"After all, the process has gone really well and, for example, that 'very lightly implemented commenting' works great for such a purpose of informing and stimulating debate among the townspeople. We received almost 1000 comments." - Tuomas Helin, city planning architect, City of Lahti

"One competition was held almost entirely remotely and it showed that the quality of the assessment did not suffer at all. All parties succeeded in the remote evaluation. Time and money were saved when the jury did not have to travel to meetings. At the same time, however, it emerged that the very last round of evaluation required an attending meeting at which a final opinion could be formed." - Antti Pirhonen, competition secretary, Planest Oy

"Stylish and functional. A similar one would be needed for Aalto's student work evaluation process." - Antti Lehto, architect SAFA | architect M.Sc., partner, INARO

"While the discussions in traditional evaluation events may happen so that in the back row you can't hear what is being said on the boards and the attention slips to other matters, this way of working has allowed comparing and keeping proposals together and everyone's participation and interest until the very end." - Helle Juul, Arkitekt MAA, MNAL  Ph.D., CEO, JUUL | FROST ARKITEKTER A/S