Tim Starks here, one of the Board's founders. Thanks, all, for the feedback, positive and critical alike.
Matt's answered a lot of your questions very well, I think, but I wanted to add a couple things of my own.
On the heavies:
I wouldn't trust any organization that had a set of rules and broke them "just because." Springs wrote an eloquent defense of the policy vis-a-vis Wladimir here -- http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/...wlad-isnt-king
Chambers hasn't fought yet at cruiserweight, and it's not clear if he's making his permanent home there. Until then, he should be ranked at heavyweight. It's very possible he could test the waters at cruiser and find them not to his liking and return to heavyweight, then we would've moved him around for nothing. Marco Huck recently did the same thing, except in reverse, and not so long ago Michael Katsidis declared he was switching divisions, then immediately changed his mind. I think it would be a bad idea generally speaking for a rankings organization to rank or unrank fighters until they ACT on their stated intentions, although perhaps there are scenarios I cannot currently envision where it would be a good idea.
Angulo was left out of our junior middleweight rankings when they were inaugurated in October. There was a good debate about whether he belonged in the top 10 or not, but the majority of people who weighed in on it felt others were more deserving. Dirrell also prompted some serious debate, with some not liking him in the super middleweight top 10 at all, some not liking him very high and some wanting him higher than we had originally proposed. His placement where you see it was the result of a compromise between all those factions.
FWIW, I like where we have Dirrell personally, but still wish Angulo was in the top 10 of his division. That's the nature of the beast, though. Not everyone will agree with every ranking every time. I'd say, though, that I think there are good and rational arguments for Angulo being left out and Dirrell being where he is, even if I don't agree with them all. The goal of a rankings organization shouldn't be to please everyone all of the time, but to come up with a credible set of rankings. I think we've achieved that, but we'll always be interested in hearing from people about where they think we're wrong.