Not saying no one should measure, but that in the camera world these measures are blown way out of proportion for what they should be. And if they're truly just measuring sensors, then shouldn't be the rating be identified to the sensor, and not the camera?? Pretty sure multiple camera's use the same sensor, but you don't find the sensor score, you find the camera score.
Under the "cameras" tab on their page, I see "camera sensor database", "camera sensor ratings" and "compare camera sensors".
I don't think they're making it a secret that they are benchmarking sensors.
They present scores in "Portrait" and "Landscape" and "Sports" even though their criteria do not apply to many critical elements of those photographic activities. Yes, they explain what they mean by those terms, but to the average consumer the name is going to mean a whole lot more than the actual test criteria.
What descriptions would be more appropriate in your opinion ?
I know for my sports photography, the sensor itself is the least of my concerns and yet they present low-light ISO as a singular element for their "sports" score. Again, not an outright lie, but it sure seems intentional to mislead people that aren't willing or interested in reading the fine print.
How precisely are they trying to "mislead" people ? This is a step beyond simply criticising their choice of naming, here you appear to be accusing them of choosing the names in such a way as to favour their business.
Well, please do substantiate this accusation a little. For example, how do they benefit from calling their high ISO use case "Sports" instead of "event photography" or "wedding photography" ?
Also, it's clear that you don't like their choice of names. It's not clear (a) what you would choose instead, or even (b) if your choices, with the benefit of a few years of hindsight (e.g. after everyone has had their chance to publically critique DxO's), are any better.