Well, this proposal is a tough one for me … I’m genuinely excited about the work OG Tracker is doing. And Chris is a super nice guy ! So, I’m a fan!
But this proposal? It’s incredibly weak. I had hoped it would set an example of how to define clear milestones, but this is the exact opposite.

And then there’s the staggering $604,400 price tag—Most of the budget is going toward maintaining existing operations and incremental upgrades, instead of addressing critical gaps in the ecosystem.
If so much money is going into this solution, why is there still so much manual work involved in what they’ve built? They’ve allocated 7,840 hours for tracking operations—that’s 980 days or 2.5 years! And remember – that is not development, that’s ‘management’ …

They mention 3 FTEs and 3 part-time FTEs, but who are these people? No names, no roles, no transparency. If we stripped away the name "OG Tracker," would we still approve this proposal? Be honest...

What I do know is that exactly one year ago, we were paying $35 per hour for 'tracking operations,' and now it’s already $60 per hour—yet this isn’t mentioned anywhere. Take a look at this quick overview I’ve created : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19ytQ41ZnfZT3fmBhFjxpxEb6ahLUC_aDgb_Z4lSZuV4/edit?usp=sharing

Even their "full transparency report" is questionable. It’s missing critical details. For starters, what period does the report cover? How much funding did they receive to create the application or features? How many people worked on it (was it an internal team)? And it’s riddled with meaningless ChatGPT-like fluff. Take the last sentence, for example: "We have created unique analytics and charts to provide valuable insights around them."
Really? I think I need to teach some people how to write a proper project report because this is definitely not it.

While everyone in the community is a huge fan of milestones—and yet, what do we see in this new proposal? Vague milestones with no timing or progress markers. How are we supposed to measure success? They suddenly throw in terms like "proof of work integration" without explaining what it is or how it adds value.

This could have been a shining example for the community, but honestly, I’m personally so disappointed… (again, we need something like OG tracker in our ecosystem, but this document/proposal doesn't reflect what I expect from them…) I hope you all understand, and Chris – no hard feelings here… I truly hope this proposal succeeds, but I also hope you take my feedback to heart and understand why I have doubts about it. 

And when we’re talking about 600K, it’s only fair to voice our doubts.

Hello to all members of the PermanenceDAO!

Thank you very much for your support and your feedback, totally appreciated!

On behalf of the Polkadot Hungary DAO:

We have voted Nay on your proposal as we think the costs are too high and the product developed wouldn’t bring better results. The proposed new badging system for community would make navigating and getting information more complicated. And would create additional layers of confusion. A proposal can be Aye-d or Nay-ed already with relevant information clearly and openly communicated on Polkassembly/Subsquare.

We also think OG Tracker team evaluating proposals is not the best as the results can be corrupted. We recognize the badging system was a plan to solve this however the promised results and costs of development is not justified.

You can view how the Polkadot Hungary DAO evaluated ref. 1362 on our public page [here].

Dear @OG Tracker,

Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is AYE.

The Medium Spender track requires a 50% quorum and simple majority according to our voting policy. This proposal has received five aye and two nay votes from ten members, with two members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

> The referendum received majority support, with members praising OG Tracker as a valuable and effective tool for the Polkadot ecosystem. However, many highlighted a preference for breaking the proposal into smaller milestones or quarterly periods to enhance accountability and transparency. While this concern led some to abstain or vote nay, supporters felt the tool’s proven track record justified continued funding, even as they encouraged adopting a milestone-based structure for future proposals.

The full discussion, along with individual members' votes and comments, can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO

Hello Flez,

You received extensive answers to all your questions, yet you continue to disrespect my hard work and efforts.

At this point, your intentions are questionable.
It appears that you are acting in bad faith and persistently trying to undermine a genuine common-good tool that is solely focusing on helping and improving OpenGov.

Its fine. 🙂

-Gave you an honest answer about your demo and thanked you multiple times but you don’t accept it.

It is identical and not something we are looking for, sorry.

We will not change OG Tracker interface based on one individual’s personal preference.

If the vast community feedback suggests a complete remaking we can definitely do it.

However, the input we received about our UI/UX during these months was by far positive with only some minor suggestions for modifications which we immediately implemented as they were quite nice and valid.

-We provided you a detailed reply and even took it a step further to help you get a complete understanding about the reach and overall impact of OG Tracker but unfortunately was never appreciated.

Directly from the core analytics.

Happy to invite in our main server any legitimate community member that i trust to validate them if needed.

-This is not traditional VC funding but a decentralized, fully permissionless system open to everyone.

I respect and heavily support what our industry represents.
Thats why I answer to you and every other completely unknown account.

Knowing someone’s full identity doesnt assure results.
There is nothing more solid than a proven successful track record and a live operational product for almost a year to justify its quality.
This topic is already answered in more length here.

Wish you all the best in your Web3 journey.
My dms are always open in case you need any kind of help in the future.

Thank you

@1haHsRuCUCkbkPRmSrnfP8ps6cTaR2b5JCU5uNPUbxsVPbf 

100% agree

It is deeply concerning that an initiative funded by the Polkadot treasury, whose primary goal is to enhance transparency, continues to fall short of demonstrating the same within its own referendum.

Google Analytics Data: Instead of cherry-picked figures devoid of context, provide full, unaltered screenshots or access to the raw data. Transparency demands clarity, not selective disclosures.

Team Details: The community has also asked for a complete overview of the team involved. Beyond publicly available information, provide names, professional profiles, and/or links to portfolios for all relevant team members. If treasury funds are being used to pay salaries, the community has the right to scrutinize and assess the team's qualifications and contributions. You continue to ignore these requests and provide excuses that are irrelevant. Imagine attempting to raise $600,000+ from traditional VCs/investors and telling them your team slide is "hidden" on purpose. You would literally be laughed out of the room (and for good reason).

Constructive Engagement: While you claim more teams and individuals need to step forward and contribute, dismissing my UI mockup as "identical with other known OpenGov platforms" is not only inaccurate but dismissive of the work involved. Similar design patterns, such as padding and how data is displayed, are deliberate choices to improve usability and ensure a consistent user experience. Can you imagine if every app on iOS provided a completely different user experience? It would be chaotic and unusable. Consistency is a hallmark of good design, not a flaw. Anyone heading a project requesting over $600,000 in additional funding should grasp this fundamental concept tbh.

If this team and initiative truly values transparency and community engagement, it must hold itself to higher standards of accountability and professionalism. The community deserves better.

With that said, I am saddened to announce that I am officially withdrawing my support for the current OG Tracker project/team and wish them the best of luck.

— I'd like to quickly thank those that have personally reached out in support of my efforts to improve the UX/UI of OGT thus far, your support means a lot. Although I am withdrawing my support for this specific project/team at this time, I am happy to report that I still aim to launch an alternative tracking software for OpenGov in 2025 and invite any developers that are interested in getting involved to contact me at [email protected] - my portfolio is available at https://flez.xyz

Being fully doxed might improve accountability to some extent as it builds extra trust yes, especially for new teams that are completely unknown.
Other acts that definitely help, are long-term contributions or commitment to the ecosystem and of course and most importantly PoW with a successful track record in place.

However, at this current stage none of the above guarantees to the Polkadot DAO that a proposal will be fully delivered and vice versa.
We have seen multiple examples where completely anonymous teams or individuals produced greatness and fully doxxed ones never delivered their promises.
In addition, never forget that anonymity aligns with our industry's ethos and core values.

It is very likely to see this kind of initiatives taking place in the future and adding more mandatory requirements as an extra layer of security measure, for example, at least one team member should be doxxed, not only for newcomers but for everybody seeking treasury funding.

The new standard, or maybe not.
We would be in full support of the creation of an official entity, upvoted through OpenGov, that will handle this matter and also respects privacy.
It is totally up to the community to decide.

You can effectively evaluate OG Tracker and the team based on the delivered work and results we presented during these months, the proven added value to the ecosystem and the problem we solve.

Thank you

@OG_Tracker Thank you for clarifying, we will be bringing this back for a more informative decision. Wish you the best of luck, and if we have more question, we will reach out again.

Thank you for the clarification.

As stated above, possibilities are endless around this area.
All it takes is collective effort and steady steps towards that direction.

Undoubtedly, OpenGov true growth is yet to be seen and we strongly believe that the total activity will only continue to increase further in the near future.
With that in mind, we have already made certain recommendations regarding long-term scalability that would benefit not only our operations but also the broader OpenGov methods as a whole.
We focus on the long-term and always trying to introduce new features or solutions that optimize the overall experience for all parties involved.

Its also important to note that to strengthen and effectively implement any new changes you first need to create standards, improve the common-good practices and the overall expected behavior.
This is of course something that requires time, unless you take drastic measures and make direct changes at a protocol level.

Bounties are great when utilized properly and is expected to dominate OpenGov.
Your suggestion is an interesting approach yet there are several vital parts still missing that need to be addressed and effectively tackled first.
It might be challenging to onboard many individuals at once and guarantee consistency but can certainly be achieved periodically. Still is essential to collect the related data for each proposal such as expected deliverables or established duration.
Fully agree that broader participation and decentralized decision-making is the right approach moving forward. Thats why we are introducing Community Voting.

Overall, we can have endless discussions about alternative ideas or strategies, as there are many aspects on Polkadot and especially on OpenGov that can be significantly improved.
However, the key point stays the same: more teams or individuals need to join, kick-start initiatives and step forward to actively contribute and develop these solutions.

The team remains anonymous.
The founder of OG Tracker is Cris Pap, a well-established and trusted member on Polkadot with multiple notable contributions to the ecosystem over the past 5 years.
The rest of the core team consists of ecosystem agents who have been also actively contributing during these years on projects and other initiatives within Polkadot.

Please feel free to ask any additional questions you might have.

Thank you

what I meant is that while I appreciate the structure and effort of your work, I’m concerned about its scalability as Polkadot grows. The current approach feels bureaucratic to me.

A more effective solution could be to incentivize community-driven recovery efforts. Establish a bounty system where users are rewarded for recovering scammed funds or identifying fraudsters. 

Automation could further enhance this system by flagging suspicious activity and streamlining recovery processes. 
For 600K I think that we could hire machine learning experts to find a solution. 

Is the cost of tracking proposals surpassing the cost of dealing with fake proposals? I feel safer knowing that someone is tracking all the proposals. It certainly disincentivizes people from submitting fake proposals, but I think we need a better system to handle this, or OpenGov needs to build one. As OpenGov grows, we need an automated system to track proposals. 

Hello Kukabi, we totally appreciate your comment!

Having successfully completed two previous proposals of shorter duration, we felt that going for a longer period is the right next step.

However, we always take community input under serious consideration and adjust accordingly based on their feedback.

Thank you very much and Merry Christmas

@REEEEEEEEEEDAO 

Hello and Merry Christmas to all the REEE DAO and thank you very much for your comment!

First, we would like to clarify that the total amount we received so far from all our previous referenda is ~$343K and not ~$449K.

The initial request was the lowest as we wanted to demonstrate first to the community what we were capable of and give a small taste on how the OG Tracker tool and our tracking operations would look like, in a duration of 4 months.

The duration of our second proposal was 7 months, with a total request of ~$300K.
However, due to the price fluctuation we received ~30% less and that is why we submitted a top up which covered almost all the missing amount.

The main reason for the increase in costs is that our current proposal has a duration of 14 months which is doubled than the previous one.
Given the fact that OG Tracker managed to become a well-established tool in the ecosystem throughout the year, choosing to go for a longer duration was the reasonable and most right approach in our opinion.
Additionally, we onboarded one new FTE to meet the needs of our tracking operations, that increases the total working hours and costs.

We hope this answer addresses your question. Happy to answer any other questions you might have.

Thank you

Hello Cris, thank you for your ongoing support to the community. One of the question that our DAO members have brought up and would like to learn more about this continuation proposal. We noted that there is a steep rise on the requesting fund and would like to learn about the "why". From previous proposals, the 1.0 and 2.0 + 2.0 top up requests, the total request was approx. 51K DOT which with their respective valuation at the time would translate to approx. $449.34K of USDC in total, and whereas this proposal is requesting over 600K USDC. We would like to learn what is driving up the cost substantially.

Thank you for your work so far @OG Tracker. Going forward, please consider working in milestones. Quarterly, or 6-months would be ideal in my opinion. In its current form, it's a nay from me.

kukabi | Helikon

@OG Tracker

With all due respect, the current UX/UI is arguably sloppy and has lots of room for improvement.

This is coming from a professional UX/UI designer who has worked for fortune 500 companies, ran a successful design agency serving hundreds of clients for over a decade, and someone that wants to use OGT daily but it's simply too painful to do so with its current functionality.

And to be even more candid, if fixing the usability of OG Tracker is not a high priority in this funding round, it makes little to no sense for the community to continue pouring money into an initiative that can be replicated with a better solution within <6-12 months and less than half the funding.

The fact is the current OG Tracker website breaks basic design principals and it's current look and feel makes it harder than it has to be to track progress among the Polkadot ecosystem.

Some Quick Examples

1. Referenda titles are truncated (even on large desktop devices) making it hard to tell what a ref represents without clicking into it to view more details. "Treasury Proposal: Marketing an" is all you see from this screen even on a 27" iMac as an example: https://app.ogtracker.io/all?status=InProgress

2. There are buttons with no labels such as the icons in the footer on all pages (e.g., the glasses icon), that the average user cannot identify its purpose, requiring users to click random buttons just to see what happens.

3. Listings display proposer addresses instead of verified user names, forcing users to click into each referendum to discern who is behind it. This unnecessary friction hampers navigation. Example: https://app.ogtracker.io/all?status=InProgress

4. The details page for a referendum does not include a OGT Review (thus when you rollover/click this button, it loads and nothing happens). Example: https://app.ogtracker.io/smallSpender/167

5. Initiatives such as integrating Grill Chat appear to be done lazily with no consideration to UX/UI whatsoever. The current implementation slaps a "G" logo on the footer that opens up a site-wide chat room. This is obviously not the best way to handle this integration, as discussions are going to happen per referendum - not across the entire website. This is likely one of the reasons why nobody has really used the Grill Chat feature yet (it's literally just 3 people saying "hello," "cool," and "hi there" so far).

The Bigger Picture These examples are just the surface of broader usability and design issues. The website consistently breaks basic design principles, making it harder than necessary to track progress within the Polkadot ecosystem.

Proposed Solution To demonstrate what’s possible, I’ve created a new design preview in under 48 hours — without input from your team. Preview here: https://simplified-impact-303574.framer.app/

Imagine what we could do together with more time and a proper feedback loop. That said, if you still don't think that the preview I shared showcases a cleaner, more functional look and feel, highlighting how quickly this can be addressed with proper focus, then simply let me know and I will step down and wish you the best of luck with your project.

Final Thoughts Fixing these issues is not just about aesthetics; it’s about ensuring the Polkadot ecosystem has tools that serve the community effectively. Without such improvements, continued investment in OG Tracker risks being a poor use of resources.

-- Unrelated ask: Please share Google Analytics data to the community for the OG Tracker tool since your last funding round so we can see what sort of activity this project receives daily, weekly, monthly, etc.

Hello @Flez

Totally appreciate for taking the time to provide feedback to our proposal!

We immediately replied to your post and thanked you for your suggestion🙂
What you shared with us was a replica of other OpenGov platforms, where our interface is unique and very approachable for all types of users.

We even created a detailed documentation to assist and familiriaze new users further if necessary.

Additionally, we have received numerous positive comments throughout the year that specifically highlighted our UI/UX, so we feel this might comes down to personal preference.
However, we respect any kind of input and it is totally acceptable.

At this current form of OpenGov and with the overall proposers behavior, the addition of an extra team member is essential to maintain accuracy and efficiency.
The required activities are highly time-consuming and demand more hours to be managed effectively.
These tasks mainly include thorough proposals research and data collection, constant monitor of ongoing progress and communication with involved parties, extraction of PoW or reports and validation.

This is a non-stop process.
The infinite OpenGov loop as we call it.

We welcome everyone to join the tracking movement on a larger scale.
Build their own tool, remain consistent on monitor proposals and share their experience.

We are always open to collaborate, help in any way we can new or existing teams and individuals and join forces towards the same direction.

Only positive outcomes can emerge out of these initiatives and by leveraging each other's efforts.

Thank you once again for your feedback!

Best Regards.

Hello to all members of the Polkadot HungaryDAO and thank you very much for your comment!

It appears that there is a misunderstanding about OG Tracker current services and overall practices but let us clarify. 🙂

OG Tracker does not evaluate proposals.
OG Tracker validates approved proposals solely based on factual information and data.
This information is accessible to the community and we are always open to discuss in depth any proposal specifically.
However, there are few cases way more complicated and controversial that opinions could vary, which is normal.
The introduction of Community Voting solves that as it opens up the validation process to everyone.

OG Tracker and Community Voting has nothing to do with proposals being AYEd or NAYed on Polkassembly/Subsquare.
These are pre-approval processes and entirely different from what we offer.
OG Tracker focuses exclusively on post-approval by monitoring the ongoing progress and expected deliverables of each proposal.
Community Voting is about decentralizing the decision-making on the final proposal’s status by enabling voting between two badges.

Our badging system has been live since day one and determines the final proposal’s status.
This badging system is a mini form of a reputation system and has worked very effectively during these months of our operations.
We are suggesting only a new addition of an extra badge that will carry a negative connotation but much lighter as through our experience we realized that this is a most fair and reasonable approach.
You can learn more about our badging system and all things OG Tracker here.

We hope our answer helped you get a better understanding of OG Tracker and its purpose.
Any kind of feedback or voting decision is totally acceptable and always respected.

Thank you

@1haHsRuCUCkbkPRmSrnfP8ps6cTaR2b5JCU5uNPUbxsVPbf 

Just to jump in here. 

We've used OG Tracker multiple times and have had the pleasure of seeing the growth of the platform from inception all the way to what it is today. 

OGT is always available for improvements on core structures and principals — which in this case is reporting of referenda, deliverables and documentation / evidence proving good standing.

Uncertain what google analytics has to do with any of this and design is design — the most subjective field in any industry, ever.

The only question that needs to be asked here is — does OGT increase efficiency and reporting. 

That answer is Yes.

Could it be improved?
Everything can be improved. 
No doubt, over time — we will see changes, updates and design tweaks. 

As of this very moment — this service produces exactly what it has set out to accomplish and more. 

Cheers and please keep up the good work.
CD1

Lucky Friday have voted AYE. Please consider this a temporary notification after our vote has gone on chain. If you would like additional feedback on our rationale for this vote, please join our OpenGov Public Forum on Telegram here: https://t.me/+559tyPSfmGg0NzUx

Lucky Friday provides feedback once per week (Fridays) if specifically requested in our OpenGov Public Forum, and we respectfully ask that all proponents of referenda interact with us here for the sake of transparency. Please tag our Director of Protocol Relations “Phunky” with your referendum number so that he can gather the relevant commentary from our internal deliberations.

Kus DAO have voted AYE (first voting).

✅ Improves tracking of OpenGov proposals and integrates Proof of Work for accountability.

❌ High costs and questions about the necessity of new features like Community Voting.

💪 Get involved: 🔗 Discord Invite or Telegram Invite

💬 Join the discussion: 🔗 Discussion Thread 


~@Pieky

@OG_Tracker 

Anonymous teams in blockchain governance proposals raise legitimate accountability concerns, especially when requesting substantial funding. The community should be able to evaluate whether the funding amount is justified based on the team's expertise and previous work. Anonymity makes this difficult. While there may be valid reasons for wanting privacy, transparency is imo fundamental for funded proposals. I think everyone expecting to recieve funding from the treasury should present themselves. What are you trying to hide here? As a proposal vigilant you should give example. 

Thanks for your response @OG_Tracker. There are multiple ways you can receive funding in quarters, and utilizing the scheduler is one of them. You can define quarterly milestones with clear deliverables in your document, and schedule quarterly payments over a year if necessary, thus providing better guarantees to the community. I also have to state that I personally expect more transparency regarding the team members and structure.

Thanks, and Merry Christmas to you too.

Hello and thank you very much for your comment!

This is exactly what we do. 🙂

OG Tracker is tracking the deliverables and the ongoing progress of all approved OpenGov proposals on Polkadot.

There are so many more mechanisms and tools that can be developed for further actions and improve even more OpenGov accountability.
It all comes down to more people stepping up and introduce new solutions.

We are here to support in any way we can any initiatives towards that direction.

Thank you for your detailed input, any kind of feedback is always well taken and much appreciated!

At this point in time we are not looking for a complete transformation on our UI but since there is always room for improvement we are open to review and explore further any suggestions that seem fit. The preview you shared unfortunately doesnt, as it lack character and is identical with other known OpenGov platforms but considering the little time you spent it shows potential.

Regarding the examples you made, the third suggestion is indeed more useful, a practical change that can be implemented in less than 1 hour. As for the rest, lets agree to disagree. 🙂

We admire your enthusiasm and thank you for taking the time to create a one-page OGT demo!
it shows strong willingness to contribute which is something very valuable to the broader Polkadot ecosystem.
More than happy to connect and exchange ideas or help in any way we can.

Our google analytics data is still modest with 2.6K active users/31K views/290 returning/8'03 duration but this is expected given that OpenGov is in its early stages, as is our product. Currently, our platform acts mainly as a library, documenting and displaying unique information.

Our overall activity and impact can better be reflected through various other communication means where we regularly share data charts, updates and reports of our findings.
For example, during this period on X we have gained over 310K impressions with an engagement rate of 5.8% and our reach extends even further to several groups where we share our insights or to direct requests we receive from community members for specific cases.

In addition, our recently launched Self-Report feature which attracted overwhelming support and has over 50 submissions in just one month is a standalone product and is not included above.

Community awareness remains one of our primary goals and we always try to introduce new proactive ways to increase engagement as the overall OpenGov participation is still relatively low.
The upcoming development of Community Voting is one good example as it opens up decentralized decision-making and invites everyone to get involved and familiarize themselves with the process.

At the moment, OG Tracker is one of the very few tools that operates consistently to that area and we really want to see more teams or individuals stepping in and contribute to this cause.

Thank you and Merry Christmas

Who is working in the team? I see 6 people: 3 FTE + 3 PTE

Can we have the names of the full time and the partial time members and their linkedins? 

Thx!

I want to start by saying I really appreciate the vision behind OGTracker. The concept is solid and has the potential to become an invaluable tool for the Polkadot community. That said, I have some concerns about the proposed budget of $600,000+, which feels excessive for a project that doesn’t appear to require such a large team or full-time resources to operate effectively.

Over the past few months, I’ve personally reached out to the OGTracker team multiple times, offering to assist with a redesign and major UX improvements—even pro bono. Unfortunately, I’ve been met mostly with silence, which is disheartening given the tool's current state. While the concept is great, the execution falls short—the UX, in particular, renders the tool almost unusable in its current form.

I worry that the current team may not have the agility or background needed to deliver the improvements quickly and efficiently. If there’s openness to a conversation about restructuring, I’d be more than willing to help “right the ship,” building a leaner, more effective team with a clear UX-driven vision.

I’ve also been exploring the feasibility of creating a similar tool with a more streamlined approach and a much more UX friendly design, at a fraction of the proposed budget. However, I’d much rather see OGTracker succeed with the right adjustments.

I share this not to criticize but because I truly believe in what OGTracker could become—and I want to see it succeed for the benefit of the entire Polkadot ecosystem. I hope we can have an honest dialogue about the path forward.

Voting abstain for now.