This is a really great exercise in community submission, evaluation and feedback of social good projects. I hope that everyone who participates, whether they "win" or not, learns something valuable from the experience.

I personally am having a hard time picking favorites amongst the many, many worthwhile projects and causes. Often the most deserving causes have poorly articulated projects, or the worthiest tech projects seem focused on issues that are not as close to my heart.

I think the hardest criteria to apply, at least quickly in a large field of choices, are the last two: "Exhibit extraordinary leadership, passion, and resourcefulness" and "exhibit a passion for social change."

In the absence of direct connection with the group, these criteria are very hard to assess.

Typically these project evaluation processes are ceded over to a small committee of evaluators chosen because of their individual qualifications and expertise. And usually there is another layer of administrative evaluation, assessing the legal status and financial competence of the institution.

This process seems to be almost purely based on community vote count, which is really amazing. It seems that the Net2 staff will only intervene after the vote counting is done to "ensure diversity" or to "counter gaming of the system." It will be interesting to see if this is needed or necessary.