The cataloging of Free TON contest winners since the launch of the platform has evolved into the idea of another contest — Winners Works Catalog. It resulted in five different versions of sites with valuable information.
Contest terms, evaluation criteria, rewards
The task of the Winners Work Catalog contestants was to create a website that would include several reward-winning works from previous Free TON contests, and present them in a user-friendly way. After that, all rights to the site will be transferred to W&D SG. Its members will add all the other winners and continue to promptly update the information.
- To contain the results of at least 10 contests, including the ongoing ones;
- Site language — English, design — adaptive for different devices, UI / UX — user-friendly and intuitive;
- The site admin panel allows you to add contests and works, manage users, roles and permissions;
- The sources are presented on GitHub, the solutions used (CMS, plugins, etc.) are
- listed in the proposal;
- Free TON logo and style: “classic”, from the Free TON brand design contest, original.
The jury evaluates each submission on a scale of 1 to 10 with obligatory feedback on the work. Evaluation criteria are based on the principles described in the contest terms: ease of navigation, page loading speed, personal opinion of the jury, etc.
1st place — 15,000 TONs
2nd place — 12 000 TONs
3rd place — 10 000 TONs
4th place — 8 000 TONs
5th place — 5 000 TONs
The jury gave it a score of 8.88, noting the site’s structure, well-designed branded interface and bilingual support.
A filter to locate contests by subgovernances has been implemented on the site, links to contest comments in Telegram chat, contestants’ nicknames in Telegram and their works have also been added.
The developers are ready to hand over the site to Web&Design subgovernance for administration, dubbing it on GitHub and modifying the design. At the same time, they plan to continue maintaining and populating their own project.
The jury gave it a score of 8.88, positively evaluating the user-friendly interface and structure of the catalog.
The site developers emphasize that it is adaptive for all types of devices. Also in the proposal, they promise an easy keyword search on the site and convenient navigation by subgovernance categories.
Jury score — 8.70 points. Many jurors were impressed with the concise design, but some found the information provided about the authors of the winning works insufficient.
The solution was implemented in the minimalistic Free TON style, placing links to the main blockchain resources on their home page.
The work received 7.52 points for its lively animated design and meeting all the contest criteria. The site’s complicated navigation and lack of search left it outside the top three.
On the other hand, the developers created a Community forum button on the site, inviting site users to join discussion of contests and related to them proposals.
The jury gave it 5.94 points, lowering the score for an overly bright and “overloaded” interface and for its poor information content.
Some judges noted that a more detailed presentation could have helped them navigate the site and may have contributed to higher scores.
The density on the podium is impressive — only 0.18 points gap between the first and third places! Bright catalog sites is the result of outrageous competition. Their refinement and further filling will allow users to immediately recall all the winners of Free TON contests and introduce newcomers to the blockchain.