It took a while for me to find where I mentioned. It was just under the "The Ugly" part. :)
Yes it's ugly, it's not ugly actually. It just old. It's been 8 months and yes we should've updated those samples.

Before get into that, your unsolicited feedback is very appreciated. I personally would like to hear them more often.

I expected for my first time doing this that I would spend an hour. I spent four because my documentation during the process wasn't good enough. So I turned off layers to show stages in the project and made screenshots of them which is not EXACTLY how the process unfolded.

Unfortunately we've experienced many plagiarism attempts in the past. I'm not sure if it's the current prices or we really dig deep those contributions so abusers decided to step away from Utopian. Those process screenshots (documentation) also helped us to find multiple accounts (which is another way of abuse).
I personally having the same process, I complete the work first, and try to save the files many times as possible so I can easily re-trace my steps to display in a presentation. Isn't that how presentation suppose to be if you want to explain the components of your design? You'll have to go back to your design pick the good and meaningful parts and put it into presentation.
And it's widely open, it doesn't have to be the screenshots, doesn't have to be documentation, we've seen some of contributors just go with a screencast of the process. Screencasting actually help me with focus to work and has no extra work after the design, just upload it and share.

It wasn't really clear from the template exactly what I should be doing, so in some cases I just guessed. Part of the problem was due to grammar errors, so I made a PR. Most critical: which repository should be listed first???

I think that's the beauty of open source, fixed my own type. And I didn't see you made any changes on "which repository should be listed first???" - I might misunderstand the question but, the project you are contributing should be listed first, that's where Utopian bot checks. Second should be a link to steemit address with a Utopian task request or a direct GitHub issue where project owner asked for a graphic request. Thanks for improving the grammar.

The recommended project that I used as a reference did not follow the given template explicitly, which was kind of a disconnect.

As I said earlier it's too old that we should prepare a new one. It's even older than editor templates. But its main point was to improve the overall presentations back in then, every presentation should have some information about the project, a logo in various sizes, colors. This logo should be applied in a mockup for example. Files and assets should be linked at the bottom, this was prepared for this purpose actually. But definitely we should update it. But I don't think we are going to change many things because we are not trying to be too strict. Once we had rules, everyone had to follow them. Then it turned into guidelines, which is full of our suggestions. Otherwise we can face many similar, standart presentations in daily basis.

Licensing is unclear, because MIT / GPL does not technically apply to graphic works - unless they are generated, and then it's the code not the artefact that is protected. I think that there should be a definite clearing here. I am ok, because I signed and made explicit reference to the Quasar FLA that considers these issues.

Licensing also is another thing added after those recommended project. After we watch how things going on at GitHub issues, what project owner requests usually. How we should approach them, and suggest our users to do the same. We end up decided to use creative commons in general.

Thanks for pointing your observations and experiences so far. And before we update it I would like to hear any suggestions about how it should be.