Please have a read of this website, and if you would like to show your support and understanding, share this so that more people can be aware of the issue.
I have e-mailed the Home Office explaining that the review is lying about everything, and this is response that I got:
We forwarded your comments onto Tech Nation. They have provided the following statement in response:
'Applications submitted to Tech Nation for the Tier 1 Exceptional Talent visa are independently assessed by a panel of industry experts from the digital technology sector. These experts provide their opinion as to whether the candidate can be considered of an exceptional standard sufficient to merit endorsement under Exceptional Talent or Exceptional Promise criteria. They reach this decision after carefully assessing1 the information provided by the candidate within their application.
In this case, the application was assessed by two different experts, both independently concluding that the application did not provide the sufficient evidence required to endorse under Exceptional Talent or Promise criteria. Tech Nation is unable to provide feedback in addition to that which has already been formally provided2 by our expert panel.
Since the applicant has already enacted their right to a Review of their original application, and with the decision not to endorse being upheld, their options remain to either submit a new application with fresh information and evidence, which will be assessed as new by our independent panel, or to explore alternative visa routes.'
I hope you find the above information helpful.
In my application, I attached the link to the GitHub profile, and put it into the "LinkedIn" section because there was no other place to enter it. The review, however, says they couldn't see the GitHub profile. It was never the requirement for me to attach the GitHub profile link, but I thought it was more important than LinkedIn. Still, the fact that "an expert" cannot see the link in the application shows just how "carefully" they "assessed the information". The person would only not notice the link when their perception bias prevents them from seeing it and they have already made the decision against me in their head.
The response says that the feedback from the Panel of Experts was formally provided, but it is not true. The feedback that I received as the "review" was not formal at all and was in form of text just typed in a word processor. When compared to the decision letter, officially issued by the Panel of Experts, it can be called anything but "formal".