Profiles, repos, scores & roasts
Repository binding unavailable
One repository named after its owner: admirably direct, and also the GitHub equivalent of putting the whole portfolio in one very small suitcase.
Historical result · no repository binding was retained
Repository binding unavailable
With its language listed as Unknown, this project has achieved a rare level of technological intrigue: even the metadata is keeping the plot secret.
Historical result · no repository binding was retained
Repository binding unavailable
The repository is not archived and did receive a push, so it is technically alive—more like a houseplant with a calendar reminder than a bustling garden.
Historical result · no repository binding was retained
Impact
25% weight
A single public repository provides too little metadata to establish substantial usefulness, ambition, originality, or a coherent body of work.
Consistency
15% weight
The single listed repository has a recorded push in 2023, but one repository and limited activity evidence do not demonstrate a sustained contribution pattern.
Quality
25% weight
The supplied metadata includes no implementation, testing, documentation, or architecture evidence; the repository therefore supports only a low-confidence, modest score.
Depth
20% weight
One non-archived repository shows some ownership, but the available metadata does not establish substantial scope or sustained maintenance.
Breadth
10% weight
Only one repository is listed and its language is recorded as Unknown, so meaningful language or project-type variety is not demonstrated.
Community
5% weight
Community evidence is sparse: one follower and zero stars are neutral rather than negative, so this score remains near the neutral midpoint.
Based on the bounded repository sample saved with this analysis.
Non-fork sample
1
Last 12 months
0
Accepted fact
1
Profile date
Jul 2019
Scores marked Profile rating use bounded public repository metadata. Full repo analysis appears only when a separate accepted repository analysis exists.
How this score was produced
Overall = Σ(category × weight) + deterministic top-end curve
| Category | Weight | Score | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Impact | 25% | 22 | 5.50 |
| Quality | 25% | 25 | 6.25 |
| Depth | 20% | 18 | 3.60 |
| Consistency | 15% | 24 | 3.60 |
| Breadth | 10% | 12 | 1.20 |
| Community | 5% | 50 | 2.50 |
What it measures. Project usefulness, ambition, originality, and coherence. Popularity is not impact.
Evidence for liam-yeats. A single public repository provides too little metadata to establish substantial usefulness, ambition, originality, or a coherent body of work.
What it measures. Engineering and project-maturity signals supported by the available public metadata.
Evidence for liam-yeats. The supplied metadata includes no implementation, testing, documentation, or architecture evidence; the repository therefore supports only a low-confidence, modest score.
What it measures. Sustained ownership, meaningful scope, and continued maintenance rather than one-shots.
Evidence for liam-yeats. One non-archived repository shows some ownership, but the available metadata does not establish substantial scope or sustained maintenance.
What it measures. Recency and contribution patterns across the supplied activity window.
Evidence for liam-yeats. The single listed repository has a recorded push in 2023, but one repository and limited activity evidence do not demonstrate a sustained contribution pattern.
What it measures. Language entropy and project-type diversity across owned repos.
Evidence for liam-yeats. Only one repository is listed and its language is recorded as Unknown, so meaningful language or project-type variety is not demonstrated.
What it measures. A weak positive tie-breaker for supplied community signals, never a popularity penalty.
Evidence for liam-yeats. Community evidence is sparse: one follower and zero stars are neutral rather than negative, so this score remains near the neutral midpoint.
Validate. The server validates the login, signed browser session, attempts, cooldown, daily ceiling, and the single provider permit.
Collect. The VPS collector reads bounded public profile metadata and up to 12 recent repository metadata rows in volatile memory.
Rate. One pinned provider returned a closed profile-rating object with no tools, browsing, shell, or repository-content access.
Verify. Server checks bound the subject, rejected unsafe or echoed text, validated the schema, and recomputed rubric-v3 final arithmetic.
Save. Only a valid completion and allowlisted post-completion facts commit atomically; the public projection is then rebuilt.
This saved profile analysis is metadata-only and did not read repository trees, README files, or source code. Availability of new analysis is separate from this historical result.
Rated 2026-08-10 · rating-rubric/3
