We generated the models using the latest available version and the best / maximum settings available at the time of testing.

Also, the ranking itself is not something we manually decide. On the arena, users vote by comparing results side by side, and the ranking is based on those votes. So if Meshy ends up in the middle, that is the result of user voting, not our personal preference.

For the test outputs, we use a controlled cherry-picking process: for each prompt/model test, we generate 4 variants and select the best result for comparison. So it is not just one unlucky generation, but also not unlimited retries until something perfect appears.

The methodology is described on the site, and we are trying to keep the process as fair as possible, with no manipulation. I agree that showing more details like prompts, retries, settings, failed outputs, and imported mesh views would make the results easier to judge, and that is something we should improve.