Scott,
I completely agree with you. The reason I used the course listing data was that it is unequivocal, while any listing by a certifier must necessarily contain subjective opinion. People who feel slighted can argue with that, and who needs that? We have a bellyfull of those.
When the idea of grading was proposed nobody could state with any certainty just what the purpose of the list was.
To avoid questions of competence Paul Hronjak proposed using the term "measurer experience list."
The thing could become a can of worms. Are you a better measurer than me? Who decides? Will I get all huffy if you are elevated above me? To whom do I appeal?
A great deal of energy could be expended on any list that relies on annual certifier polls for input data.
I think the whole idea is busywork to no useful end.