Hi there.
Polkassembly with the Subsquare are 2 major products of governance tool on Polkadot. Which is great.
However, I voted NAY on this proposal because:

1. The requested amount is unbelievably big.
2. The request for $1,000,000 for a product that is hardly working after 2 years of development. It has constant annoying bugs, such as content not loading, loss of RPC, loss of connection with wallet, content shifting, and slow loading.

I should admit that in the last year, I personally submitted more than +25 bugs to the Polkassembly team (which is not great). However, some of the bugs were fixed very quickly.

I would suggest Polkassembly to:

1. Fix already knows bugs
2. Improve user workability
3. Lower the amount.

An additional questions to Polkassembly:

• 1. If the infrastructure cost req 92K\months, which means 92K*12=1,104,000$ only Infra cost, how can you request a lower amount?
• 2, Can you please share: statistical data of polkassembly: daily, weekly, monthly visitors, average session in min?

Thank you.

Dear Proposer,

Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is NAY.

The Big Spender track requires 60% quorum according to our voting policy. This proposal has received one aye and five nay votes from ten members, with one member abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

In the recent referendum, voters expressed concerns about the quality and functionality of Polkassembly, advocating for smaller, more focused proposals for improvement rather than a large upfront payment. Many highlighted the importance of the platform within the ecosystem, suggesting that its price tag should align more closely with similar products like Subsquare, which they viewed as superior. Overall, there was a strong desire for enhanced usability and performance from Polkassembly, reflecting a consensus for caution and incremental upgrades rather than substantial financial commitments.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO