Biggest issue is that at what point a review becomes an endorsement? if anything goes wrong later on anyway, the endorser will be scrutinized and worse, accused of colluding etc...
I might off track with what you're talking about... It's been a while since I read this thread... So so many other things renting space in my head, I have to dump more often than I'd like :-/
I agree with you. An official seal of approval is treading dangerous ground. About what I stated... It wouldn't be an approval of the coin, just informational. Supporters or not can take it how they want to. I already jotted down a list of KPIs relating to the coin's marketability, sustainability, performance and such (not that I was serious... But just in case, while it was on my mind) that could be used as the baseline 'report' if you will. The idea would be to review the code and provide assessment (sloppy, malicious, clueless dev didn't change this type of stuff) both good and bad. I also thought proving background info in the dev is a good touch ie involved in this scamcoin, etc. Also look into the claims that so and so will be accepting our coin.
Hope that ^ made sense, this damn iPad sucks, lol.
