The submission describes a legitimate-sounding academic think tank but suffers critically from a lack of technical relevance and highly questionable submission quality. While the team size and mission statement suggest a real organization, claims such as 'most people have used my product' and 'everyone' for audience reach are spam-like red flags. Furthermore, as a non-technical project (Think Tank) submitted to a technology evaluation framework without any custom tech or digital product described, it scores extremely low on innovation and utility within this specific context.
Ready to Compete for $150k+ in Prizes?
Move this data into a HackerNoon blog draft to become eligible for your share of $150k+ in cash and software prizes
Score Breakdown
Project Details
Algorithm Insights
Recommendations to Increase Usefulness Score
Document User Growth
Provide specific metrics on user acquisition and retention rates
Showcase Revenue Model
Detail sustainable monetization strategy and current revenue streams
Expand Evidence Base
Include testimonials, case studies, and third-party validation
Technical Roadmap
Share development milestones and feature completion timeline