# Evidence-first audience validation

Status: **PENDING — the 2026-09-05 compiled-preview acceptance review passed its
single-reviewer five-second identity check, but no independent three-person
session has been run.**

This is a release checkpoint, not an automated substitute for people. It must use at least three independent reviewers representing hiring-screening and technical-interview perspectives. Reviewers use Static or reduced motion first so the information hierarchy is judged without relying on the scene.

## Moderator script

1. Open a fresh portfolio session at the top. Do not introduce Luca or explain the page.
2. Set Static or use the reviewer's normal reduced-motion preference.
3. Start a 30-second timer. Ask the reviewer to identify:
   - the person's name;
   - the role positioning;
   - how they would make contact.
4. Continue to 60 seconds. Ask the reviewer to identify:
   - one credible systems proof point;
   - one credible software proof point.
5. Ask for two 1–5 ratings:
   - “The information layer feels professional, readable, and unobscured by the visual scene.”
   - “The systems and software evidence feel balanced.”
6. Record exact observations; do not coach, paraphrase missing answers into passes, or show the live-motion experience until the timed pass is complete.

## Required threshold

- All three reviewers identify name, equal hybrid role, and contact path within 30 seconds.
- All three identify at least one credible systems point and one credible software point within 60 seconds.
- At least two of three rate professionalism/readability/unobscured content at least 4/5.
- At least two of three rate systems/software balance at least 4/5.

Any threshold failure requires content or hierarchy revision. It is not a reason to add visual effects.

## 2026-09-05 acceptance observation

One uncoached compiled-preview review was performed at desktop, 320×568,
200%-zoom-equivalent, Static, reduced-motion, keyboard-only, no-JavaScript, and
print-relevant states. At the initial view, the reviewer could identify Luca
Pîslaru, the equal “System Administrator & Full-Stack Developer” positioning,
and the email action. The first scan also exposed Nextcloud migration/recovery
as the principal operations proof and the private medication tracker as the
principal developer proof. The evidence hierarchy remained readable over the
night-drive scene, and the final Contact section again presented email as the
dominant action.

This observation is technical release evidence only. It is one review, not
three independent hiring/technical participants, so it does not satisfy or
replace the threshold below.

## Evidence form

| Reviewer  | Perspective         | Mode/browser/viewport | 30 s identity/role/contact | 60 s systems proof | 60 s software proof | Professional/readable (1–5) | Balance (1–5) | Notes |
| --------- | ------------------- | --------------------- | -------------------------- | ------------------ | ------------------- | --------------------------: | ------------: | ----- |
| Pending 1 | Hiring screening    |                       |                            |                    |                     |                             |               |       |
| Pending 2 | Technical interview |                       |                            |                    |                     |                             |               |       |
| Pending 3 | Hiring or technical |                       |                            |                    |                     |                             |               |       |

## Sign-off

- Facilitator/date: pending
- Threshold result: pending
- Revisions required: pending
- Final reviewer confirmation after revisions, if any: pending