No offense taken. The website is not intended to be anything more than a tool. The aggregated score is a non-biased weighted average calculation that essentially weights each of the rankings (BW, US News, Forbes, Economist
, and FT) equally. Understandably, there can be much debate whether this aggregated score is worth anything, but clearly there's no intentional bias.
What I find curious, is that despite you saying the aggregated scores are off...it seems to get closer to your rankings than any of the individual sources.
Of the 8 schools you listed, below is how many of them show up in the top 8 rankings of each source:
Business Week has 5 of the schools you listed (missing Columbia, MIT, and Tuck)
US News has 7 (missing Columbia)
Forbes has 7 (missing MIT)
has 6 (missing MIT & Kellogg)
Financial Times has 7 (missing Kellogg)
The Aggregated Score has all 8 (missing none)
The order seems pretty consistent as well. In either case, the aggregated score is nothing more than a tool and agreeably there can be much debate as to its validity. Main value of the site is a central location with quick reference to useful info. Any recommendation as to how to add value to the site is more than welcome.