Polkadot ERI team has published this article, with the claims that it was an in-depth evaluation and well received by the community. While it is lengthy I don't really see a lot of depth in there, I certainly wouldn't call it a research article it's more like an opinion piece if anything. It's mostly a summary of a lot different projects and other events in the blockchain industry with a few sentences about each on how they relate to Polkadot but it's the opposite of in-depth in my opinion so this brings me to question their other work.

Since they've been involved in the community for quite a while but the community growth doesn't seem to be there, could this be the time for introspection of their methods to build a community in the region around Polkadot? They do have an impressive number of articles with a lot of words in them but at the end of the day the objective shouldn't be to produce X amount of articles with Y word count, the metrics I would hope for is community growth and engagement which I fail to see here. Hopefully the team can respond to some of these questions, in the meanwhile my first vote would be NAY.

Dear @The Ionian ,

Thank you for your feedback.

I would like to first ask whether the in-depth report you mentioned requires a large number of charts and data. It's important to note that in-depth reports come in various types. The strategic report we propose focuses more on operational direction adjustments. Its value lies in translating industry experience into an actionable roadmap, rather than pursuing formal depth for its own sake.

As the saying goes, "There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people's eyes." Our content has received positive feedback from developers, users, and institutions alike. In fact, this article was recommended to official internal forums and read by many members of the Parity and Web3 Foundation, who spoke highly of it. Therefore, we have full confidence in the report's credibility.
Additionally, the report's core emphasis is on presenting feasible operation strategies—these are insights distilled from years of industry experience, which are not easily quantifiable through data or charts. However, those with practical project operation experience will find our content highly relatable.

Regarding the issue of community growth: as a team that has been building on Polkadot since 2019, we have witnessed many community members holding DOT when its price was above $50, $40, or $30, only to hold through declines to $5, $4, or $3. During this period, many became disheartened and left due to severe losses, while others expressed anger and frustration. Maintaining community retention under such circumstances—while continuously providing confidence—has been no small feat. As a research organization, our primary focus is on producing high-quality content and offering solutions for the ecosystem. We also strive to make Polkadot's complex technical developments accessible to ordinary users through our interpretations, thereby contributing to its growth.

That said, we have also expanded into overseas markets. Our Twitter account has grown significantly over the past year, evolving from a small profile to one with visible traction. The content we produce also garners substantial readership: I personally translate some of our in-depth reports into English and share them on Twitter, where they often attract thousands—sometimes even tens of thousands—of views: https://x.com/Zou_Block/status/1911363611798520160.

In this fiercely competitive landscape of public blockchains, the Polkadot ecosystem needs constructive ideas rather than abstract theoretical debates. The best way to predict the future is to build it. Let us focus on actionable steps together and create tangible breakthroughs for Polkadot during this critical window of 2025.