Profiles, repos, scores & roasts
#1074 · Top 1.9%
Linmic
Dog lover. Web performance maniac. Work heavily with React. Very much in love with minimalist design.
GitHub tourist
red alert
Overall
0.0/ 100
Repository binding unavailable
Kumiko input exercise is the portfolio’s clearest non-forked protagonist: small enough to finish, mysterious enough to make the rest of the repository list look like its extended cinematic universe.
Historical result · no repository binding was retained
react
Keeping a React fork is a bold way to say “I like frontend foundations” without having to choose between building an app and alphabetizing the ecosystem.
Repository binding unavailable
A fork of a Vim CSS tool in PHP combines three kinds of developer nostalgia into one repository: editor customization, stylesheet wrangling, and a language wearing a retro badge.
Historical result · no repository binding was retained
anim_encoder
anim_encoder brings a Python media-processing premise into a portfolio otherwise crowded with web tooling—a compact plot twist with more motion than the timeline suggests.
homebrew
The Homebrew fork adds package-management gravitas to the collection, like displaying a borrowed tool chest and hoping nobody asks which wrench you made.
Impact
25% weight
The portfolio shows interest in web tooling, JavaScript, Ruby, Python, and a small exercise project, but the available metadata does not establish substantial original impact or coherent flagship work.
Consistency
15% weight
The supplied repositories span 2011–2018, but the listed project activity is largely historical and there is no contribution timeline establishing sustained recent work.
Quality
25% weight
Language and project metadata indicate real technical experimentation, while the high proportion of forks and lack of implementation-level evidence limit claims about engineering maturity.
Depth
20% weight
There is evidence of many repositories and some domain exploration, but most listed projects are forks and the metadata does not show sustained ownership, scope, or maintenance depth.
Breadth
10% weight
The listed work covers JavaScript, Python, Ruby, PHP, CSS, and an unknown-language repository, with web libraries, tooling, data, and an exercise project represented.
Community
5% weight
Community evidence is neutral: the profile has followers and a few repositories have minimal stars, but popularity is not used to raise or lower the other scores.
Based on the bounded repository sample saved with this analysis.
Non-fork sample
1
Last 12 months
0
Accepted fact
95
Profile date
Apr 2009
Scores marked Profile rating use bounded public repository metadata. Full repo analysis appears only when a separate accepted repository analysis exists.
linmic /
43/100
An independently owned JavaScript exercise project, providing the clearest signal of a personal project among the listed repositories.
linmic /
24/100
Forked Python project named anim_encoder; a media-oriented technical direction is visible, but ownership and scope are unclear.
linmic /
22/100
Fork of React Native in JavaScript, indicating mobile-web ecosystem interest without evidence here of independent additions.
linmic /
22/100
Fork of React in JavaScript; the metadata shows participation in a major frontend codebase but does not establish original ownership.
linmic /
22/100
Fork of jQuery Mobile in JavaScript, reflecting familiarity with an older mobile web ecosystem rather than demonstrated original development.
linmic /
22/100
Fork of Guard Shell in Ruby, representing exposure to developer automation tooling without evidence of sustained ownership.
linmic /
22/100
Fork of Homebrew in Ruby, connected to package-management tooling but not demonstrably an independent project.
linmic /
21/100
Fork of a JavaScript postal-code project, showing a practical data utility theme with limited ownership evidence.
linmic /
21/100
Fork of cssnano with CSS metadata; it signals interest in frontend optimization tooling but little independent scope is visible.
linmic /
21/100
Fork of a JavaScript hook utility; the repository name suggests a focused tool, but metadata alone cannot show its implementation quality.
linmic /
21/100
Fork of a Vim CSS tool implemented in PHP; useful tooling context is apparent, with limited evidence of independent work.
linmic /
20/100
Forked repository with an unknown language and a color-oriented name; the available metadata offers minimal evidence for evaluation.
How this score was produced
Overall = Σ(category × weight) + deterministic top-end curve
| Category | Weight | Score | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Impact | 25% | 25 | 6.25 |
| Quality | 25% | 30 | 7.50 |
| Depth | 20% | 24 | 4.80 |
| Consistency | 15% | 28 | 4.20 |
| Breadth | 10% | 48 | 4.80 |
| Community | 5% | 50 | 2.50 |
What it measures. Project usefulness, ambition, originality, and coherence. Popularity is not impact.
Evidence for linmic. The portfolio shows interest in web tooling, JavaScript, Ruby, Python, and a small exercise project, but the available metadata does not establish substantial original impact or coherent flagship work.
What it measures. Engineering and project-maturity signals supported by the available public metadata.
Evidence for linmic. Language and project metadata indicate real technical experimentation, while the high proportion of forks and lack of implementation-level evidence limit claims about engineering maturity.
What it measures. Sustained ownership, meaningful scope, and continued maintenance rather than one-shots.
Evidence for linmic. There is evidence of many repositories and some domain exploration, but most listed projects are forks and the metadata does not show sustained ownership, scope, or maintenance depth.
What it measures. Recency and contribution patterns across the supplied activity window.
Evidence for linmic. The supplied repositories span 2011–2018, but the listed project activity is largely historical and there is no contribution timeline establishing sustained recent work.
What it measures. Language entropy and project-type diversity across owned repos.
Evidence for linmic. The listed work covers JavaScript, Python, Ruby, PHP, CSS, and an unknown-language repository, with web libraries, tooling, data, and an exercise project represented.
What it measures. A weak positive tie-breaker for supplied community signals, never a popularity penalty.
Evidence for linmic. Community evidence is neutral: the profile has followers and a few repositories have minimal stars, but popularity is not used to raise or lower the other scores.
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