I've had great interactions with Polkaworld and have seen them step up their english content, which helps bridge activities outside of China. It would be great to set up OKRs to be results (developers building projects) rather than actions (numbers of content generated)

Polkaworld is the most important and valuable media in Chinese speaking areas. Their contribution and dedication should be supported.

The chinese community is very important and the work that PolkaWorld is doing is very important for that community. AYE.

It seems they are overselling themselves, and find it a little expensive, their following is not massive as you would expect.

Polkaworld is one of the most active players in the Asian community. The asked amount is also very reasonable. We look forward to seeing them continue their activities.

Taking Yongfeng's sentiment into strong consideration. Not all things make sense in the proposal, but we support Chinese speaking areas and the need to continue growth here.

A lot to breakdown and discuss with this proposal, first and foremost to get it out of the way: Polkadot needs exposure in the Chinese market, as with any other market, so this type of marketing (articles, interviews, educational videos) simply have to be funded by the treasury. Looking at the metrics from last year, engagement seems not high as many would have liked but this can't just be seen as a failure of the team as there are many factors that drive engagement. However, my concerns are more on the opaqueness of the budget, looking at the proposal document it seems like all of the budget is allocated to paying the salaries of 6 people producing 24 articles (2 articled per month is a two person job?), 1 interview per month + 2 livestreams + Chinese translation, 4 online broadcasts (per month I guess), 4 educational videos (total????), and 1 designer. In my opinion this is a gross overestimation of the amount of work that needs to be covered to produce the content in the proposal, either the hidden costs are included in the salaries (they do mention paying for travel etc. themselves) which means they have done a poor job of representing their costs or they're way overpaying for the content that's getting generated. If Polkaworld's work in the China market was a huge success some of these irregularities could have been ignored but I think further clarification on the budget is necessary at this stage.

PolkaWorld is an important part of the Chinese-speaking community. Their consistent content and cross-language efforts justify continued support. Aye.