← Round 3 gallery

Round 3 scorecard — weighted re-grade

Same five personas, re-grading the three synthesis variants (each grader re-read their own round-2 review first). Weighting per Michelle: chair (G3) and mid-career doc (G2) count double. Full rubric: graders.md.

Unweighted winner · 85.3

A — Field Notes, refined

Wins on register. Brooks 54 ("every round-2 objection answered"), Adler's #1, Patel's #1 ("B's biggest strength grafted onto the register Dev already trusted").

Weighted winner · 84.8

B — Indigo Oath, de-templated

Wins on structure — and on Michelle's weighting. Okafor's #1 (brass index-tab catalog, timeline fixed), Webb's #1 with the round's top score (55, "index → detail").

A statistical tie: A by 0.6 unweighted, B by 0.7 weighted. Both are top-2 for all five graders. The choice is the warm colleague's journal vs the institutional index — both now carry the same conversion machinery. C is a unanimous third (78.7): the palette validated, the page a collage.

Scores (/60)

Variant	G1 Brooks	G2 Patel ×2	G3 Okafor ×2	G4 Adler	G5 Webb	Unweighted	Weighted
A — Field Notes, refined	54	52	45	51	54	85.3	84.0
B — Indigo Oath, de-templated	50	51	51	47	55	84.7	84.8
C — Paper & Indigo blend	48	50	44	45	49	78.7	78.6

Fix list for whichever wins

If A: un-clip the Wednesday scatter on small phones; content-driven slip sizing; fix the 960px curriculum stagger; de-SaaS the CTA hover; add a mid-page CTA; give 201–203 more than a dagger footnote; consider anchor-linking the syllabus card like B.
If B: restore quiet ceremony to "private by design" (a keyline card, not a full band); make the timeline add detail beyond titles; fix the doubled "Next step" label; warm the register one notch; give 201–203 more than a footnote.
From C either way: adopt its in-code WCAG contrast-audit practice in the final build.

Full reviews

G1 Brooks · G2 Patel · G3 Okafor · G4 Adler · G5 Webb · scorecard.md