Well, that might be what it's for, but that's not how it works. The Funded doesn't have the data. It's full of random meaningless flattery ("Great firm!") or random complaints ("Partners were fiddling with their blackberries during my pitch.") It has very little useful data and this is an industry where nobody wants to burn what could turn out to be an important bridge.
I must admit that I have not used it for a long time - since just after it launched. I remember there was some decent feedback on there, especially with regard to separating out the better partners from the also-rans (I used some of the advice wrt angel funds). There was also a lot of gossip. The star rating system seemed about right.
Based on what you are saying, it is very different now - which is a shame. It can only be as good as the data entered, and you would hope that entrepreneurs would not be afraid to post criticism, especially since you can remove finer details and remain anonymous.
The trouble is, you can't remain anonymous. You just had a meeting with partner X. During that meeting, he kept getting up to go to the bathroom to do lines of coke. You write, "Met with X. He kept getting up to do coke. Avoid." Guess what? Now he knows who you are.
