A few concerns and clarification requests regarding this proposal:

## 1) Reliance on a centralized, closed-source indexer

At the moment, the PolkadotCloud Staking Dashboard appears to rely heavily on a centralized indexer. I previously [opened a GitHub issue](https://github.com/polkadot-cloud/polkadot-staking-dashboard/issues/3074) to ask (politely) about this dependency, but the issue was deleted rather than answered.

Could **[@Ross and Joel | Polkadot Cloud](/user/13MNarAqpNkginnQb6gTNq2QnieZGs2SKu8JdK9LLxo6ksEP)** please clarify the following:

1. **Open-source / transparency:** Since the indexer has been funded via OpenGov, can the indexer code be made public?
2. **Respecting user preferences:** When a user selects to connect via the *light-client*, the SPA still appears to fetch most data from the centralized indexer. This feels misleading. Can you commit to honoring the selected connectivity mode (and not use the indexer when the user has indicated that they want to use the light-client)?
3. **Issue deletion:** Why was the GitHub issue deleted rather than addressed?
4. **Resilience:** Can you ensure the application remains functional (even if a bit slower) when the indexer is unavailable?

## 2) Analytics / tracking and user consent

Another concern is that the dashboard seems to track a large portion of user interactions without explicitly requesting consent.

Could you please:

* explain **what is collected**, **why**, and **where it is sent/stored**; and
* provide a way to **disable analytics** (opt-out), ideally with privacy-preserving defaults?

I strongly believe OpenGov-funded initiatives should meet a baseline privacy standard (explicit disclosure + user control).

## 3) Validator commission “flipping” UX mitigation

AFAIK the dashboard still hasn’t addressed the validator commission flipping UX issue discussed here:
[https://forum.polkadot.network/t/are-validators-flipping-commissions-and-running-multiple-identities/16569/7?u=josep](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/are-validators-flipping-commissions-and-running-multiple-identities/16569/7?u=josep)

This can be prevented all together with UI improvements (as shown in that thread). It’s concerning that it hasn’t been implemented yet, and the proposal doesn’t mention addressing it. Can you commit to adding safeguards / clearer warnings and surfacing recent commission history prominently?

## Closing

To be clear: **I’m not opposed to funding this initiative**. I am asking that these issues be acknowledged and addressed with concrete commitments (and ideally scoped deliverables) before/alongside funding.

Thanks for considering these suggestions.



On behalf of the Web3 Foundation, we are voting AYE on Referendum #1831.

Following further internal reviews, our funding committee agrees that the Staking Dashboard has consistently provided good value for the Polkadot ecosystem. We particularly support the team’s direction toward increased decentralization via light client integration, which aligns with our shared technical priorities for the network.

We also appreciate that the team recognizes the dashboard as a public good and is prepared to move the repository and domain under the Polkadot Community Foundation as soon as the necessary mechanisms are in place. We would like to thank Joel and Ross for their consistent professionalism and responsiveness throughout our coordination over these past months.

Dear Proposer,

Thank you for your proposal. Our **first** vote on this proposal is **ABSTAIN**. Below is the evaluation of our [voting policy v0.3](https://docs.permanence.io/voting_policy/voting_policy_v0.3.html) on this referendum:

```
MEDIUM SPENDER
--------------
8 available members
🟢 2 • 🔴 0 • ⚪️ 2
✓ ≥50.0% required participation met
✘ Ayes ≤50.0% of all votes
▶ Ayes and abstains are >50.0% of all votes
⚪ ABSTAIN
```

Below is a summary of our members' comments:

> The comments reflected mixed positions regarding the proposal for a staking dashboard. Some members recognized its useful role in supporting staking users and noted that the requested budget was reasonable for six months of work by experienced developers. They supported the proposal for its strategic relevance and timely maintenance of staking tools, even with a reduced budget. Other members, however, expressed reservations, citing their limited use of staking interfaces and concerns over imminent changes in staking and validator systems. They worried that a comprehensive overhaul might be necessary soon, which left them cautious about fully endorsing the proposal.

The full discussion can be found in our [internal voting](https://voting.opensquare.io/space/permanence/proposal/Qmdq88Fue1pbNsGN2MVwUf5XRbXEXJSBKvvu7NUrjcYMGY).

Please feel free to contact us through the links below for further discussion.

Kind regards, Permanence DAO Decentralized Voices Cohort V Delegate 📅 [Book Office Hours](https://cal.com/permanencedao/office-hours) 💬 [Public Telegram](https://t.me/permanencedao) 🌐️ [Web](https://permanence.io) 🐦 [Twitter](https://twitter.com/permanencedao) 🗳️ [Delegate](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/user/15ubZj6T7NUYyQw6j4XBkEMJ2vew5w9kqKEcN1QG7Z1weKDV/votes)

**Proponents**
Ross Bulat and Joel Kenny

**Beneficiary Address**
13MNarAqpNkginnQb6gTNq2QnieZGs2SKu8JdK9LLxo6ksEP

**Track**
Medium Spender

**Requested Amount**
$66,000 USDC

**Funding Period**
6 months (February 2026 – July 2026)

**IPFS Link**
https://bafybeic7xzt4y2g6hwrma2h2ysmq4jcw2iuhxc7ablscebdanbcg4aph24.ipfs.dweb.link?filename=%5BPUBLIC%5D%20Polkadot%20Staking%20Dashboard_%20Protocol-Aligned%20Development.pdf

We present a revised proposal for the Polkadot Staking Dashboard, demonstrating fiscal responsibility and strategic focus based on community feedback. 

This proposal delivers protocol-aligned maintenance - sustaining the reference staking implementation while maintaining readiness to adapt to critical protocol changes including DAP, 1-day unbonding, and other staking system evolution.

**Full proposal details on Google Docs:** https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IwbdBg3SesJpszE1I5jsWUvSCNseK1UvpP-j_zYu1C0/edit?usp=sharing

- **Who:** Ross Bulat and Joel Kenny are working on this project.
- **What:** They want to build a Polkadot Staking Dashboard.
- **Goal:** To help people understand and use the Polkadot staking system.
- **How Much:** They are asking for $66,000.
- **How Long:** The project will last for 6 months.
- **Why:** To keep the dashboard updated and ready for new changes in Polkadot.
- **Where:** More details are in their online document.

#210·Polkadot Staking Dashboard: Protocol-Aligned Development