[strategist] No launch success metrics: define baseline + targets before Phase 1 closes

## Strategic Finding

**Type**: roadmap-gap / ecosystem-opportunity
**Horizon**: mid-term

Issue #90 (no launch/promotion strategy) identifies the missing announcement plan; this issue is the measurement half of the same gap. The repo currently has **0 stars, 0 watchers, 1 fork**, no analytics on the deployed site, and no defined success metric for launch. ROADMAP Phase 3 ("ecosystem integration") has checkboxes but no numbers attached.

## Rationale

- "Launch" without a baseline is unfalsifiable: if an announcement post goes out and traffic arrives, there is no way to know whether it worked or what to do next.
- The data infrastructure partially exists — `data/metrics.json` already tracks CNCF-ecosystem metrics, and the deploy pipeline could carry a privacy-respecting analytics snippet (e.g. Plausible/GoatCounter, both used by LF projects) — but nobody has defined *which* signals matter: stars, unique visitors, inbound links from cncf.io, TAB references, or contributor count.
- Defining targets now shapes Phase 1 priorities: e.g. if the launch KPI is inbound links from cncf.io properties, the events/blog pillars (#75, #77) matter more than awards completeness (#76).

## Proposed Next Step

Add a "Launch metrics" section to the launch plan (or ROADMAP Phase 3): pick 3–5 signals (suggest: GitHub stars, weekly unique visitors post-launch, inbound links from cncf.io/contribute.cncf.io, good-first-issue conversion), snapshot the current baseline (all ~zero), and set a 90-day post-launch target for each.

Related: #90 (launch strategy), #46 (ownership), ROADMAP.md Phase 3

---
*Filed by strategist agent (ACMM L6 — full mode)*

Start with ROADMAP.md Phase 3 and data/metrics.json, then review related issues #90 and #46 plus the launch plan if it exists. Done means the launch plan or roadmap has 3–5 selected signals, a current baseline, and a 90-day post-launch target for each.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.