For the Mandatory Criteria section for external recognition, would having your work be referenced or credited on Youtube channels be sufficient for one of the evidences?
In my example, a code tool that I created is used for a mod in a very popular game has been featured in several Youtube channels, including one with 800,000 subscribers and others with 10,000 - 300,000 subscribers. It’s open-source and other evidence will be provided in the OC2 pathway, but does this count as “external” recognition?
For MC, just having your work referenced or credited on YouTube is not sufficient to show recognition. However, it also depends on who credited your work and the context in which it was used, was your name mentioned? Even at that, it will be a weak MC. If all I have stated are met, it would still need to be complemented with one or more very strong MC pieces of evidence. 800,000 subscribers and others with 10,000 to 300,000 subscribers are not there primarily because of your tools that were being used, nor are they following you, so this weakens it even more.
Suggestion: You can use the open-source metrics to show you were the developer or a significant contributor to this substantial open-source that is being credited by creators, by showing their mention of you or your tool, a compilation of code commit summaries, repo stars, or similar metrics such as download statistics where possible and yes, if substantial this rightly meets MC.
Also, be mindful of using the same evidence across criteria, as they need to be unique for a strong and convincing narrative.
I hope you don’t mind if I have a related question. Is it a good idea to split up evidences for both MC and OC2?
My main MC evidence is a LoR and public details about companies that have been sold that I was a lead engineer at, but I wanted to sort of “steal” my public recognition evidence for my OC2 into my MC to make the MC more compelling. I have different and unique evidences for OC2 that I think are still strong. Maybe this makes my app more confusing?
@cheeze Whilst both MC and OC2 are focused on recognition, they each look at recognition in different areas and with a different focus. Because of that, swapping evidence between them should be done carefully to make sure each piece rightly fits the criterion you’re using it for.
If you want suggestions on how best to structure it, I may need to see the full evidence set, feel free to DM me.