If you invited vendors to add their names of a pool of merchants whose goods were going to be reviewed, that would probably allow for reviews with the most credibility and least amount of apes like myself screwjacking about the reliability of reviews. What I mean is that only vendors who agreed to have their goods 'tested' would get a review that would be shown pubically. If the intentions of the reviewers are legit in that they want to protect consumers and improve quality of products, then the readers will be sure that little bias is being used if the merchants being reviewed volunteered. The biggest problem with this would be that inevitably the big stores would probably tell their merchants not to allow their 'exclusive' products to be reviewed. The big stores are probably going to try to quell it either way. I think though it's going to be tough not to seem like a witchhunt...even if names are chosen out of a hat (randomly), they're still chosen out of a finite quantity of names which will exclude others. The exceptions in the current draft themselves point out that 'assumptions' are already being made. I applaud the aim and hope it becomes a good thing for both consumers and merchants. If it's able to 'enlighten' all merchants in ways to make better products, I think that'd be the best case scenario. Ha ha - it's going to get a lot of friction but hopefully will weather the storm. Here's a toast to its hopeful success :)