Hello @lemouth,

As it was pointed out by @justyy, submissions are reviewed according to the guidelines for development contributions if the history of the work done is closer to 2 weeks since it's been merged or incorporated in the project. It is quite not clear which history part you would like to get reviewed. The initial part which you probably point to takes place over 2 months. The included image suggests not to focus on the more recent updates of the project.

However, we can see the potential and value of the project and your publishing efforts, which are always on the top level. Therefore, your contribution will be reviewed according to the blog criteria.

As I mentioned above, we have seen many amazing posts published by you. The same quality can be seen here because you are able to put all information into a well-organised and enjoyable format.

I am glad to see that you were able to make progress with the project. Beginnings can be difficult, but it seems that you have overcome all obstacles during the initial stage and created a foundation for the future development of the tool.

I would like to recommend that you put descriptive information in the repository. The Steem users, including Utopians, may see the relation between your updates on Steem and the repository on GitHub. On the other hand, the project lacks a description so people on GitHub have little chance to know what it is about unless they go through the code.

Your contribution has been evaluated according to Utopian policies and guidelines, as well as a predefined set of questions pertaining to the category.

To view those questions and the relevant answers related to your post, click here.

[utopian-moderator]