● Access vs quality: To remove financial and institutional barriers, the platform enabled open submissions without fees. To prevent quality dilution, I introduced an “Abelar Writing Style” guide that set clear editorial expectations before submission. ● Visibility vs perception: Rather than positioning Abelar as a traditional submission portal, I framed it as a digital magazine. I worked with designers using low-fidelity sketches to guide content hierarchy, readability, and editorial flow. ● Single audience vs ecosystem: The platform was structured to serve distinct but connected user groups, including contributors, readers, implementation partners, and opportunity providers. This ensured publication was treated as the starting point for engagement, not the end. ● Growth vs engagement: Instead of deferring interaction features, likes and comments were treated as core signals to surface high-interest ideas and enable direct engagement with researchers. The platform also surfaced grants, hackathons, and innovation programs relevant to published work.