The reviews are taken from the spreadsheet reviews and responses are given to each afterwards.

Thank you to everyone who left a review!

Summary of the review concerns with a response

• Lack of risks mentioned - The main risk for this initial phase mostly revolves around a lower skill set in the smart contract and self sovereign identity (SSI) space. As I am already a developer will make learning these areas far easier and are skill sets that will be developed over time.
• Lack of timeline / milestone dates - In this first phase I'm not full time on the project so committing to a milestone of dates didn't feel appropriate as that would mislead people. In the future my aim is to be full time on the project as the initial stages are further fleshed out.
• Concerns with competing with big tech (LinkedIn) - Competing directly could definitely be a losing battle. Mentioned in the documentation is the focus on creating a 'win win' situation for professionals to create a profile and get benefit for creating that profile such as receiving a cheaper service linking it up to a protocol or DApps.
• Concerns with only being in a planning / research stage - This approach makes a lot of sense for this project to minimise risks to the Catalyst funding resources. To request funding for a large scale project would maximise risk and minimise the number of projects that could be funded. Small low risk bets make it easier to see in the future whether more funding should be allocated.
• No experience with technical specifications - Collaboration with the community and developers will be an important part when working on this stage to get feedback. Just one person to independently do a technical specification wouldn't make much sense for an interoperable system that require a lot of collaboration.
• Whitepaper not peer reviewed or published - This project is not a deep technical project like the Cardano smart contracts, concensus layer or similar. In this stage that level of depth and review is not necessary for professional profiles.
• Lack of human resources - The initial scope was made low due to this reason and once there is increased clarity on the exact requirements then more people can be onboarded to support the project in future work. ****
• Educational content methodology - The educational content will be light and not to the quality of a book or peer reviewed paper. The quality of the content should match the budget allocated for it which is a small amount. The purpose of the content is to help other projects speed up their resource finding, avoiding pitfalls and provide some general guidance.
• Lack of value from professional profile DApp - This initial phase of a quality professional profile opens up the door for the other ideas such as decentralized marketplaces which was the original idea for the project. It makes sense to start with a strong base of a professional profile so that anyone can build on top of the work rather than trying to work on a more complex product like a marketplace initially.

Reviews

Review - The challenge identified is current and needs a solution.

The proposal to develop technical specifications can be the first step that has been set as the aim, however, the creation of educational content on existing systems like Atala Prism has been set as step one. There is a need to bring out stepwise milestones clearly.