From contribution to validation
The journey follows mineral-exploration reality: information quality comes first, followed by a technical decision on whether to proceed.
| # | What it shows | |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | Organize the starting point | Gather location, context, information origin, and existing materials. |
| 02 | Define the contribution | Explain whether it concerns land, geological evidence, public data, or technical capability. |
| 03 | Go through review | The team checks relevance, traceability, permissions, and investigative value. |
| 04 | Validate when appropriate | Only prioritized contributions move to deeper analysis or field guidance. |
| 05 | Follow upcoming criteria | Recognition and reward rules will be public before activation. |
Choose how you can participate
Each contribution source requires different evidence and safeguards. Select the profile closest to your situation.
- Land or territory: For people who know an area and can present its location, context, and legitimate relationship to the land.
- Technical knowledge: For professionals contributing geological, geochemical, remote-sensing, or field-validation expertise.
- Data and technology: For organizations with datasets, sensors, processing, models, or infrastructure that can improve investigation quality.
Participation with clear criteria
Contributing does not mean automatic approval, a mineral discovery, payment, or mineral rights. Technical quality and responsible land practices come first.
- Traceability: Every input needs a clear origin, context, and understandable limits of use.
- Consent: Private data, documents, and land access only proceed with proper authorization.
- Technical decision: Review may end the journey when evidence or method fit is insufficient.
- No early promise: Rewards can only exist after public rules, eligibility, and availability are confirmed.