The presumption here is that the list will be abused by founders more than the VCs it was explicitly created to enumerate do their position vis a vis founders.

The presumption here is that the list will be abused by founders more than the VCs it was explicitly created to enumerate do their position vis a vis founders. I think that attitude is no small part of why this problem is as deeply rooted as it is. That is: which is the greater harm? Founders getting abused by VCs without this list, or VCs getting accused by founders with it? Maybe it reflects my categories and biases more than reality, but I know which way I'm inclined to err, there.