TechNation Talent Rejected. To appeal or apply for promise?

For MC1, all recommendations speak well of the applicant but none of them demonstrate how the
applicant has achieved national or international recognition in digital technology in the past 5 years. The X 2022 panel talk, the Y2022 panel talk, and the Y 2023 workshop do not clearly demonstrate how the applicant was singled out as a lead keynote speaker to verified and notable audience attendance at a sector leading event in digital technology.

  • I wasn’t singled out as a lead keynote speaker. I was invited to host a workshop in Y conference 2023 and then also asked to be amongst speaker for the main event. I attached a link the video on youtube clearly showing where i was invited and spoke on the main stage. I also attached a link to the website (which i realized was broken because they’d changed url) i explained briefly what the conference was about and the number of attendance. I also attached a screenshot of my invite letter. Is there another way to present this evidence? In X and Y2022 I was invited to be on a panel and submitted the above as evidence.

It is not clearly demonstrated how the x and Y Academy examples demonstrate national or international recognition in digital technology in the past 5years. The X example also appears to be mentoring. Compensation alone is insufficient to meet this criteria. MC1 is not met.
X and Y are evidences of me reviewing the work of others. I am also a mentor on Y and have to review the works of my mentees. I added the invite emails, screenshots of me reviewing the works of others so i’m not sure what else to show and what they mean by not demonstrating international recognition…

For OC3, while respected, the workshop template shows modest traction. It is also unclear how this had a resulting notable and tangible impact on a product-led digital technology company where the applicant was an employee, founder, senior executive or board member. – Modest traction - 545 views and 161 users. Also i submitted this evidence as proof of open source contribution.

The X, Y and Z examples are not paired with notable, tangible and verified impact. The impact listed is self-authored and not backed up by third party supporting evidence. – I am a designer and this bit talks about my technical contributions where I gave an overview of the project, my role, work done and impact. I also added links to the Figma page and live project as well as to a detailed case study on dropbox(this was dismissed) I no longer work for companies X and Y and don’t have access to “3rd party supporting evidence” but to be honest i don’t know what they mean by this. Company Y is my current company and my manager in their recommendation letter made mention of my impact on the team. but this wasn’t acknowledged or considered.

The X app screenshot shows a modest 50+ downloads and there is no other verified impact shown.
I am a co-founder and the CPO of X app and we recently launched in beta to a small group of people about a 100. In order to test. evidence submited was a screenshot of the app of playstore that showed 50+ but also a screenshot of the database showing 96users from our launch event.
I designed the website and mobile app and co-built it using a no-code tool Adalo and i attached a screenshot of the page showing the screens.

The Y article is very much respected but does not clearly demonstrate how the applicant made a significant technical, commercial or entrepreneurial contribution to the field as a founder, senior executive, board member or employee of a product-led digital technology company that resulted in notable and tangible impact such as meeting a notable KPI, metric or driving significant commercial traction. Letters alone, without sufficient third party evidence to back up the claims made, are insufficient evidence. OC3 is not met.
I attached the link to an article where the founders of X app - myself included was featured and interviewed on a respected platform for entrepreneurs.

Summary for the decision:
Based upon the applicant’s career history, they may be eligible for the exceptional promise pathway.
However as the applicant would not meet MC1 or OC3 for the exceptional promise pathway, we have
provided feedback against the applicant’s chosen pathway, the exceptional talent pathway.

The Medium articles shown in the applicant’s CV do not demonstrate notable viewership or recognition. - i did not submit these as evidences so I’m not sure why it was referenced. it was just links to articles i’ve written I add to my CVs

Sorry for the long read and thank you for your help and response. @Francisca_Chiedu

Is this a promise or talent application?

It’s was for a Talent application.