Hello there, ICOBench team.

I'd like to open a topic on the value of ICOBench's experts opinions and whether some of the are not abusing the rights they have.

I am member of Vernam's team - a promising project running for more than two months now, with upcoming token sale in late May.
When we launched our project, of course the first platform we listed ourselves was ICOBench, as the most respected one on the web.

We started getting reviews by experts. Normally some are good, other are bad. The most valuable ones are helping us improve the project with constructive feedback.

Anyway, there are some reviews that worry us. For example this one:




Obviously Mr. Berger didn't like the project and we can't blame him. Anyway, he didn't provide any feedback, just the low scores. I decided to make my own due diligence and I found out that:

1. At the time when he rated our project, Mr. Berger was running an ICO himself, as a CEO - Pecunio.
2. 90% of the projects he rated at that time got really bad scores. See:




This makes me think that Mr. Berger used his expert status to harm competition in a really lame way. How will you comment this?