I am just concerned that there could be some people could interpret the information wrongly and start witch-hunt.

I tried to position the post in such a way as to avoid this and as you say, nothing in here is intended to suggest that the authors who receive the highest number of upvotes don't deserve it.

I'm happy to tweak how the information is displayed (within the parameters of my coding ability) - I considered removing users who have received fewer votes and then decided that if people see the wide range of users being upvoted, this can only be positive so I left it.

However (as you say), there are rules that come with booming and this will highlight when these rules have been "challenged". It also allows those that perceive there to be a bias or favouring of certain users to have this information verified, or invalidated.

There have been numerous comments about how some communities are abusing their booming privilege to fill their own pockets. If there are such users and they become aware that a post like this is being published then perhaps they will think twice and we'll slowly get the upvotes to the people more deserving.

The community has been longing for some transparency, this will hopefully provide some.

I also hope that others follow your lead in leaving a comment on posts that have been nominated. There is a distinct lack of trust on the platform at the moment (dare I say, for obvious reasons) and I hope this will be the first (potentially painful) step in restoring some.