The effort he put was at least announcing what he was going to do and reading all the data sent to him (as PM or in his thread).
It is clear that he didn't put a lot of work in additional investigation but it is better than nothing (... OK arguably).
There are several items that I consider a bad practice:
The paid AND not clearly indicated positions in the list (if any).
The non-weighted criteria (for example 5 points for hardware, 10 points for reliability, 7 gut feeling).
The unexplained gut-feeling (actually if the above rule is available this is OK).
The article needs a lot of improvement but it needs to start from somewhere...