Instead of limiting the total number for the top 20, the bar is at "awesome": more than 444 designers can be awesome, each in their own right.
No doubt there are more than 20 awesome designers out there, but from a client's point of view, I would think the zero-sum nature of a top X list would do a bit more to ensure that the designers are worth their weight. Think of it like Billboard's Top 10/20/100. I'm not saying this model would be better, just that it would be interesting to see how this sort of presentation would influence a potential client's perception of quality.
But unlike Dribbble, we're not looking to build a popularity contest.
Actually, let me ask here: how much does popularity of a designer matter to you in choosing a designer to join your team?
For a bootstrapping startup trying to ship: not much.
For a brick and mortar business looking to help establish their web presence with a mobile app: quite a bit.
And often times it's the latter category of clients that pay more.
I'm just brainstorming here, not criticizing Scoutzie at all. You guys are off to a great start.
Good breakdown on where popularity matters. Thank you. We'd love even more ideas too if you care to share!
It also looks as though all it takes is downloading the Teehan+Lax template and making a few fake iOS layouts to join as opposed to real mobile/responsive experience. I'd find a lot more usefulness as both a designer and a scout if there was more to it than that since mobile UX is imperative to the success of the product and UI has a lot to do with that (static images - especially taken at those dreaded angled/screenshotted Dribbble perspectives - of an interactive experience don't sell me).. otherwise I'll just search Dribbble for "mobile" to find someone's profile and get a better gist of their overall skillset, be it more code- or design-based.
Right, because your quality of work is so outstanding, that you are to judge. A little jealous, perhaps?
I agree UX is imperative to the success of a product. But so too is the code, its marketing efforts, and more. Can you elaborate a bit more on what you're getting at?
After Kirill's remark I'm not sure why I'm replying, but my overall point is that the lack of minimum shots-per-project give little to no context of the app or the cohesiveness of the UI, which is why it's hard to tell if they're real or just concepts. I also think it would benefit the designers and scouts alike to have their uploads sorted by project so you aren't just clicking into a random assortment of thumbnails and you/your perspective clients can link others to specific ones instead of saying "Click on the one with the big pink star."
There is a huge gap between average and great, and whenever someone suggests that Scoutzie folks are just average, I won't hesitate to remind them otherwise.
Given your further feedback, I don't think you were aiming at the designers, so my apologies for incorrectly assessing your comment and snapping back. Sorry.
Additionally, there's a drop-down to say you have experience with responsive, but there's no follow-up to that. Does that mean you have experience building the hi-fidelity mockups or are you actually building the media queries? Those are the questions I would have as a scout or how I'd want to distinguish myself as a designer, since a lot of employers either expect both skillsets or make them two entirely separate roles.
Sorry if I came off as harsh in the initial response, I understand the need for a service like this, but couldn't really tell how it couldn't be superseded by the current go-to for finding designers until there was a little more focus/drilling-down of projects/skillsets that the "competitor" doesn't give you the room to include.