# Scoring rubric Score only ideas that passed the [crypto-necessity test](crypto-necessity-test.md). Each dimension is 0–3, total /15. ## Anchors | Dimension | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |---|---|---|---|---| | Founder fit | no edge | adjacent at best | real domain fit | unfair advantage | | MVP speed | months | 3–4 weeks | about 2 weeks | under a week | | Distribution | "anyone" | a broad segment | a specific community you can reach | the first ten users are nameable | | Market pull | no signal | anecdotes | live complaints or ugly workarounds | people already using or paying for a bad alternative | | Revenue path | none | hand-waved | a credible pricing path | a clear buyer and a pricing logic | Score market pull from the [customer-signal rubric](customer-signal-rubric.md), not from enthusiasm in the conversation. ## Tie-breaks When totals are close, rank by founder fit, then MVP speed, then distribution, then market pull, then revenue. A large market never rescues a weak wedge. ## Shortlist diversity The three candidates must not be the same product shape. Spread them across at least one of these axes: - infrastructure vs application layer - B2B (or protocol-facing) vs consumer - a fast tactical wedge vs a deeper platform play If all three still land in one bucket, say what about the founder or the category forced it. ## Bear case, every candidate Two sentences each, written before the decision: 1. The most likely way this dies. 2. Why it still survives the cut despite that. A candidate without a bear case has not been scored.