A couple of constructive things pertaining to the tier list that I won't say/ask in the tier list because I don't want to start a dog pile that derails the list.
Who is this list targeted towards?
As it stands, it seems like it is trying to serve too many people. You have it laid out like it's meant to help beginners, but your defined methodology is only useful to people who already know what they're looking at. Perhaps you guys could create a guide on terms used and link that in the list (along with the efficiency guide) . This would go a long way to making the list beginner friendly. It feels in the current form like it's lost between being a reference for those who already know and a tool to help beginners. It can be BOTH with a little bit more work.
Do you believe that persons reading and abiding by this list should be able to look at the information, then check it against the source material to aid in drawing their own conclusion?
If you weren't taking notes while making this list and citing while you were going along, it's likely going to be WAY too much work to go back and do that, but I feel that anyone reading this list should be able to trace your footsteps and verify for themselves what you found. As the list is presented, it's more "we did all the work, just believe what we are saying." This is not helped by statements like "All information below is opinion based on fact" you could replace that statement with something like "This list is intended to help new users make smart decisions when picking a power supply, and provide those who already know with a quick reference. This list subject to change just as variables in technology change." Making it a mission statement and less an authority sounding statement.
I also do not believe the "Notes" section addressing those who complain about tier lists belongs there. You simply need not address those people. You are only validating their complaints by shinning a light on them and giving people who would otherwise never think about it reason to doubt tier lists. It is doing more harm than good.
If you were a person who wrote one of the reviews that you used to make certain conclusions in the list, would you be happy with the way you were presented as a source? Also, would you have been annoyed that you were not made a source at all when the list was first published?
This is not asked as a question that I want you to answer. Just something you'll need to think about with anything you do. You did not get where you are by yourself. The work put into your sources deserves the SAME respect you expect from the work you are doing. The way you went about sources put a damper on the entirety of the list for me. It was brought to your attention before the existence of the 4.0 list and blatantly ignored. Your claim of being busy especially didn't hold weight when you came back with a basic source list 20 mins later. It just looked bad.What's done is done and I don't want you to dwell on the past, I just don't want to see credibility harmed in this way going forward. Projects such as these should have sources respected and collected from the moment you start them.
I ask these questions and make these statements as I don't feel there is a clear mission statement as it pertains to the list. I feel like that contributes a lot to the disagreements that happen within the list and some of the negative attention it gets. You could strengthen the list a lot by closing some of the holes it has. Will you please everyone? Never. BUT it could use some clarification in its direction to help all involved with it and all who come across it.
With that out of the way, I admire the work that went into this list otherwise I would not have taken the time to express my opinion. It is simply MY opinion and you are free to disregard it in its entirety. Though I hope this will not be the case. You don't need break down anything I've said and make a point by point reply. My "questions" were more the voice of someone reading a tier list and less ME wanting answers.