I mean there are plenty of editors who are open about their boost capabilities. Some communicate with the nominated writer, some don't. I find observing their behavior, seeing how much of their own work is self boosted in the pub, if the same people get boosted repeatedly while other writers flounder gives me an idea of who I'm dealing with and whether I want to submit to someone who is not always going to prioritize my or other writers work. Many of my boosts are anonymous/self published which I prefer. I read an interesting article by Ariel Meadow Starling that stated they are well aware of the pitfalls of self interest/human nature in the program and factor that in. Quite what they are doing about it I don't know. I can't help but wonder if editors who suddenly see a downturn in their boost ratios are being penalized for favoritism and they are quietly spreading them around more evenly. But who knows, it's hardly transparent as you say. Sorry for tangent!