E

EmpCloud

conf 0.55

Thunder Marketing · 1Touch-dev

Manish Chandrakar

manish@kyma.world

2026-09-30 · showing up to 2026-09-30 · live data last updated 30 Sept, 05:08 UTC

Hours tracked

1.9

1 days tracked

Hours per day

1.9

on days with tracked time

Mean activity

32.3%

never scored

PRs opened

0

in this period

PRs merged

0

none opened

Median time to merge

—

nothing merged

Commits

1

1 repositories

Lines changed

6,445

context only — never scored

Identity

A person is only measurable across the providers they are linked to.

aws Manish_Chandrakargithub manishKymahubstaff Manish Chandrakar

Evidence confidence for this person

0.00floor 0.601.00

0.40 against a 0.60 floor — no composite score is computed and no alert can fire for this person (AC-05).

Delivery signal

An input to a conversation, not a verdict.

Steady

76

rank 1 of 3

behind ≤ 67median 6876 ≤ leading
craft 25%89
change discipline 18%71
consistency 12%58
completed work 22%—
infrastructure 15%—
review 8%—

Why this reads as “Steady”

The band is cut from this period's own distribution, not a fixed threshold. The arithmetic is below so it can be checked rather than believed.

76 of 100, ranked 1 of 3 people with a score, against a cohort median of 68. The bands are cut from this period's own distribution, not fixed thresholds: ≤ 67 is behind, ≥ 76 is leading, and this person is in the middle 40% of people with a score this period. With every component at the cohort median this person would score 73; they score 76. No single component moves the score by as much as a point; the position comes from the spread across all of them, not from one weak term. 3 of 6 components (completed work, infrastructure, review) could not be measured at all, so the remaining weights were rescaled — this score rests on 55% of the intended evidence.

A band compares this person to the 3 people who have a score in this window — nothing more. It is not a rating, it does not persist, and it moves when the cohort or the window moves.

How this number was built

Every term is shown with the rows it came from and the cohort figure it was judged against. If a term looks wrong, the tables below are the argument.

ComponentWeightScoreCohort medianEffectComputed from
Craft25%89890185 of 211 commits name what they changed
Change discipline18%71710median commit 609 lines
Consistency12%5844+3.1code landed on 32 separate days
Completed work22%———not scored — never assigned a task in any connected tracker. Scoring 0 here would read as "delivered nothing" when the truth is that no tracker describes this person’s work.
Infrastructure15%—15—not scored — has an AWS account but made no infrastructure changes in the window. Not scored as zero: console access is not a job description, and someone whose work is code has not failed at ops.
Review8%———not scored — no review is recorded anywhere in the organisation, so this term has no data for anyone. It is withheld rather than scored 0 — a 0 would read as "does not collaborate".

Effect is a counterfactual, not a share: how many points this person’s score would move if that one component dropped to the cohort median for it. The effects sum to 76 − 73 = 3, where 73 is what this person would score with every one of their components at the cohort median. Negative rows are the reason the total sits where it does. A component with no data is withheld and the remaining weights are rescaled — it is never scored as zero, and it never counts against anyone.

Measured but deliberately not scored: 1.9 hours tracked, 1 commits, 6,445 lines changed, 33.2% activity. The first four measure motion rather than delivery and are trivially inflated. CI is excluded because it exists on a minority of repositories, so scoring it would rank people by which repository they work in. This score cannot see architecture, planning, mentoring, incident response or infrastructure work at all.

Flags raised · 1

Observations about the work, not judgements of the person. None of these feed the score. Each one shows the rule that fired and what it does not prove.

  • ⚑ Only 3 people produced code this period — too few to rank against

    Rule: relative bands need at least 4 producing people — found 3.

    What it does not mean: The component scores are still measured. What is withheld is the comparison: with a cohort this small, "leading" and "behind" are noise wearing a number.

Employee KPIs

Six of the twelve. Where a value is absent the reason is stated — never rendered as a zero.

Focused project ratio

conf 0.90

0%

All 1.88h went to Hubstaff projects that are not mapped to any repository or external key. This is a project-mapping metric, not a diligence metric — it measures our configuration, not this person's focus.

Evidence confidence

conf 1.00

40%

Below the 0.6 floor, so no composite score is computed and no alert can fire (AC-05).

Accepted difficulty pointsblockedNone of this person's 0 work units reached acceptance (merged + first CI green + ≥1 review).
First-pass acceptanceblockedNothing accepted, so there is no first-pass rate.
Idle classification mixblocked0 of 15 intervals carry a class.
Tokens per accepted pointblockedNo AI usage data connected.

Day by day

Tracked time beside code that landed. Click a day for the raw Hubstaff intervals behind its hours.

DayHoursAct%CommitsPRs openedPRs merged
▾ 2026-09-301.8833.2100

Raw Hubstaff intervals · 2026-09-30

StartEndAct%ProjectSourceProvider row
02:3202:4051.95Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321293327
02:4002:4268.79Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321293349
02:4202:420.00Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321293374
02:4202:4328.89Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321294975
03:0003:1058.46Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321378763
03:1003:2045.67Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321402821
03:2003:289.36Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321404575
03:4503:5024.18Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321467676
03:5004:0032.33Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321487567
04:0004:1031.83Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321533455
04:1004:2013.50Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321571793
04:2004:3016.67Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321571806
04:3004:4027.83Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321608847
04:4004:5048.67Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321635627
04:5005:0026.83Thunder Marketing's Projecthubstaffhubstaff:10321665643

15 rows from time_intervals. This is the bottom of the chain — there is nothing below it but the Hubstaff API response.

Where the time went

Hubstaff project attribution.

Thunder Marketing's Project1.9h15 rows

What was not counted

Commits excluded from output, with the reason stored on the row.

Nothing of this person's was excluded in this window.

Pull requests · 0

The rows behind “merged” and “reviewed before merge”. Every one links to GitHub.

No pull requests opened or merged by this person in this window.

Commits · 1 counted, 0 excluded

Default-branch history only. Work on unmerged PR branches does not appear here — see the pull requests above.

SHARepoMessageWhen+/−Counted
534e76bbancadacapibaribe.comfirst commit2026-09-30+6,445 −0counted

This is wrong

Anything on this page can be disputed. A correction is a stored row, not an email — it stays attached to the figure it challenges.

There is no authentication in this POC, so the submitter is self-declared. Before this platform is used for anything that affects pay, this field has to come from a real session.

Corrections on record · 0

Open disputes are shown to anyone reading this person's numbers.

Nothing disputed yet.