founders-club

@talent is focused on developers, which makes a lot of sense since developer contributions are relatively easy to verify through onchain activity or GitHub data. You've previously mentioned plans to expand into other categories, with creators being the next priority. I assume that’s partly because Base has a strong creator community, and creators often produce digital content that can also be tracked and verified.

That said, how do you approach evaluating the quality of output, especially when it comes to things like smart contracts or creative work? It feels like ranking quality, beyond just activity, is a much more subjective challenge.

Also, when you eventually expand into other professions like designers, marketers, or community managers, where contributions may be less visible or harder to tie directly to onchain data, what specific challenges do you anticipate, and how are you thinking about solving them? @macedo 

你们目前还是主要聚焦在开发者身上，特别是在 Base 上的开发者，这个方...

When evaluating quality beyond activity, we focus on signals rather than subjective judgments. For developers, we track metrics likeGitHub stars and smart contract interactions as objective proxies showing how others value their work.

For creators and future professions like designers, we're building around "recognition by peers" - tracking verifiable signals like attestations from established professionals. Rather than perfect assessment, we aim to create enough signal-to-noise difference to identify genuine professionals from those simply claiming credentials.

building @talent to help builders stand out 
| caretaker at /build

对于创作者或设计师这种产出偏主观的职业，你们会怎么设计指标，既能反映贡献又不失公平？会参考现有平台的数据吗？ @macedo 