Co-Creation Sprint - Delegation Discussion Thread

General
,
1

Hi everyone,

We are sharing some of the thinking behind how we currently envision the role of delegates in the upcoming DAO structure. This non-taxative list is derived both from learnings of the Scroll DAO in particular, as well as broader tendencies regarding governance participation across the ecosystem.

First, it is worth mentioning that delegates still constitute the backbone of decentralized governance, and their activity continues to represent the exercise of the programmatic rights enabled by distributed ownership. Over time, a fair number of iterations across the ecosystem have expanded on what delegate activity looks like, and each protocol has landed on different answers according to their needs and values.

In that sense, there are several aspects we consider relevant and are excited to discuss in detail with the DAO as we shape this next iteration of Scroll delegates. On a high level:

Token holders <> Delegates
With SCR being a governance token, the relationship between holders and delegates is intrinsic. Staking is about to become a pillar for SCR, and linking this new use case to governance opens a new avenue for deeper participation.

Community <> Delegates
Delegates are and should remain part of the broader Scroll community. Initiatives such as Local Nodes can benefit greatly from delegate engagement, helping keep local ecosystems active and growing.

Ecosystem <> Delegates
Native ecosystem projects such as Ether.fi, USX, ChatterPay, HoneyPop, Garden, and others represent Scroll’s primary vectors for revenue and growth. Advocacy, product usage, feedback, and domain-specific research are areas where delegates can meaningfully contribute.

All of this comes with a renewed understanding of what being a verified delegate means, with new criteria under consideration to better categorize the different types of DAO contributions and stakeholders.

Below are additional design considerations that reflect our current thinking.

1. Staked SCR as the foundation of delegation

Staked SCR is becoming the pillar of our delegation system. Staking SCR should be a requirement for delegation, and the effective quorum for governance operations should be based on staked SCR. This aligns economic commitment with governance responsibility and strengthens the legitimacy of decision-making.

2. Staked SCR as a value accrual asset for delegates

Staked SCR is a yield-generating asset. Since delegation will be directly tied to staked SCR, we have explored a mechanism where, once staking matures and produces sustainable yield, a percentage of that yield could flow to delegates proportionally to the VP delegated to them.

This creates a series of positive effects:

• A permanent incentive to remain an active delegate
• A flywheel where delegates are motivated to attract more staked SCR
• A natural revenue share alignment between token holders and the delegates who represent them

This mechanism is intended as a longer term design consideration once the staking product is fully mature.

3. Verified Delegates as a higher responsibility role

Verified Delegates should no longer be only a tag. Instead, this status should come with additional expectations, privileges, and responsibilities.

We envision the following characteristics:

• Verified Delegates will be the only suggestions available during the inactive delegation process
• Staked SCR revenue share (once implemented) will only apply to Verified Delegates
• Verified Delegates will be prioritized for contributor roles in councils, committees, and working groups

Initial Verified Delegate cohort
The initial cohort would be approved by Scroll Foundation using criteria such as:

• Participation in more than 90 percent of active proposals to date
• Demonstrated contribution throughout 2025
• A maximum cap for the initial cohort, open for discussion

Future batches would be approved by the Execution Council and the DAO. Verified Delegates may be entitled to slightly higher incentives to reflect their responsibilities.

4. A more proactive system for inactive delegation

Inactive delegation remains a challenge, and several mechanisms are under consideration to address it.

Front-end APY lock for delegators to inactive delegates
Since staking requires periodic reward redemption, APY rewards could be locked for users who delegate to inactive delegates. To redeem, they would need to re-delegate to a Verified Delegate. This creates a simple and incentive aligned solution for keeping governance participation active.

Inactive VP Pool
Inactive voting power could be placed into a pool that behaves similarly to the current Auto Abstain Wallet or inspired by the strategy used by Obol. In this model, if a proposal has statistically clear community support, quorum is close, and the voting window is about to close, the VP Pool could vote in favor to help finalize quorum. This reduces governance bottlenecks while staying aligned with community behavior.

5. Future evolution of the Governance Contribution Recognition system

The GCR system worked well during 2025, but the feedback highlighted the need for clearer expectations and a narrower scope of participation.

Key questions include:

• Which behaviors should be incentivized
• How to create clearer expectations for delegates
• Which evaluation criteria provide the most value to the DAO

For now, we can continue with a GCR-style mechanism while designing a more comprehensive system for 2026. The goal is to set clear expectations upfront so that delegate compensation matches actual responsibilities and avoids situations where delegates participate for months with unclear compensation outcomes.

We hope this post provides a clear outline of our current thinking. As always, we are excited to discuss these ideas with the community and collectively shape the future of Scroll governance.

We invite the community to join the next Co-Creation Sprint session this coming Monday, where we will focus specifically on these items related to delegation and roles within the DAO. Your participation and feedback are important as we move toward this next iteration of Scroll governance.

Thanks!

9 Likes
2

In order to continue amplifying points of view and context around delegation, we have created the following Miro Board for the community to provide their feedback:

Please help in filling it out by end of week. We will continue discussing this next week.

2 Likes
3

The above link to the Miro board requires access permission. Instead this one has open access: Sign up | Miro | Online Whiteboard for Visual Collaboration

4

The DAO is at a very interesting moment to activate verified delegates as a higher-responsibility role that includes working with stakeholders like grantees, Local Nodes, Councils, and working groups, especially after the great work done to professionalize delegates through the Scroll Delegate Accelerator Program.

Just as I agree that a higher-responsibility role should include higher incentives, it’s important that we can guide the discussion toward greater objectivity so the criteria for becoming a verified delegate include:

  • Participation in the required percentage of active proposals.
  • Active contributions in the forum and governance calls.
  • I also think it would be useful to measure contributions regarding their involvement in the DAO with grantees, Local Nodes, Councils, and working groups thought links, forum posts, articles.

These criteria should be explicit enough to allow for the selection of new verified delegates whenever vacancies open up as part of a natural process, where the Scroll Foundation identify verified delegates who haven’t met the criteria to maintain their badge, thereby creating new vacancies in cycles to encourage more active participation from delegates.

3 Likes
5

Hi there! :nerd_face:

I think this initial proposal aptly considers the economic incentives for participation (Staked SCR) and raises the issue of eligibility criteria (for becoming Verified Delegates). :raising_hands:

But I believe a missing piece is ‘what kind of work they will perform’ (beyond providing feedback/vetoing proposals and participating in a Referendum from time to time).

Here, I suggest dividing it into three verified delegate tracks, recognizing different ways delegates can provide value:

  1. Strategic Governance: Voting, reviewing proposals, giving constructive feedback, and signaling long-term needs.

    • @Verified-Delegate: Maintains active participation in DAO governance through voting, proposal review, and long-term signaling, serving as a bridge between token holders and organizational direction.

  2. Operational Roles: Project-based work with compensation via bounties or retroactive funding.

    • @biz-dev: Interfaces with grantees, ecosystem partners, and prospective collaborators to maintain relationship continuity and unlock opportunities.
    • @marketing: Crafts public-facing narratives and updates that inform, inspire, and engage internal and external audiences.
    • @community: Coordinates engagement across regions and technical communities, surfacing grassroots insights and activating aligned contributors.

  3. Support (Squad) Roles: Coordination functions that improve DAO-wide visibility and coherence.

    • @Weaver: Designs and reinforces the shared language, rituals, and social norms that foster a healthy contributor culture and signal alignment across the DAO.
    • @Scribe: Captures key insights, meetings, and process outcomes into accessible documentation that supports transparency, learning, and auditability.

Reminders:

Each track is optional and stackable.
A person can inhabit several roles.
A role can be inhabited by several people.
Roles can be removed and added according to immediate needs.

Here more info on the Concept of Roles in Holacracy.

With this model, delegates could remain focused on signaling/voting or step deeper into day-to-day contributions with clearer accountability and rewards. Don’t you think?

Anyway, I stay tuned for any questions/comments on this. :slight_smile:

6 Likes
6

From the ongoing Co-Creation Sprint discussions, we have been reflecting on the following key questions raised in this thread

However, to answer these effectively, we believe a more fundamental question must be addressed first: What are the core goals Scroll is optimizing for in the next phase of the protocol?

As highlighted by Juan during the co-creation calls, Scroll’s 2026 priorities center on improving token performance and increasing user adoption. To achieve these outcomes, governance must evolve beyond simple voting participation. We must move toward a clearer definition of delegate roles, contributor activities, and a framework for observing and evaluating meaningful impact.

Based on delegate feedback from the Miro board , we have analyzed and categorized these priorities into 4 Strategic Pillars. The breakdown below illustrates how specific delegate roles and activities map to these goals to ensure total alignment with Scroll’s vision.

1. Ecosystem Vitality (Onchain Growth & Liquidity)

Scroll’s primary challenge is bridging the gap in liquidity and activity compared to other L2s. Delegates must act as catalysts for network effects by prioritizing resource allocation to growth-centric initiatives.

  • Sub-Area: User Adoption

    • Growth & Strategy: Delegates who analyze and support strategic initiatives aimed at scaling the Scroll ecosystem, ensuring sustainable network expansion and long-term protocol adoption.

    • Education & Content: High-context delegates who translate complex protocol and ecosystem updates into accessible narratives to lower the barrier for new users and builders.

    • Local Event Organizers: Delegates who bridge the gap between the DAO and local communities, ensuring Scroll’s presence in emerging markets is strategic and impactful.

  • Sub-Area: Builders Advocate (Grants & Building)

    • Grant Designers & Reviewers: Delegates who design and oversee grant frameworks, moving beyond “disbursing funds” to prioritizing apps with high “stickiness” and enabling novel onchain use cases.

    • Product Quality Tester: Delegates who provide a critical feedback loop between ecosystem developers and the DAO, identifying UX friction points that hinder adoption.

  • Sub-Area: Strategic Partnerships

    • Partnership Lead: Delegates who facilitate and evaluate collaborative alliances with external protocols, platforms, and institutions to expand Scroll’s ecosystem reach and strengthen its market presence.

2. Network Resilience & Security

  • Security Reviewers & Auditors: Technical delegates who provide oversight on protocol safety by reviewing smart contracts, zkEVM components, and major upgrades to identify vulnerabilities and reduce the risk of critical failures before deployment.

3. Data Transparency & Open Analytics

  • Data Analyst: Delegates who help contribute to turning raw data into accessible insights. They validate proposal metrics and track initiative ROI, ensuring governance decisions relies on facts rather than sentiment.

4. SCR Token Utility & Economic Flywheel

  • Incentive Designers: Delegates who research and propose reward mechanisms (such as the upcoming delegate staking reward alignments) that align long-term holders with the protocol’s success.

  • Utility Researchers: Delegates who explore and evaluate potential protocol-level utility, technical integration opportunities, and mechanisms to drive sustainable demand for SCR within the Scroll ecosystem.

  • Watchdogs: Delegates who oversee treasury decisions to ensure transparency, accountability, and alignment with Scroll’s long-term interests, ensuring every SCR spent contributes to the network’s long-term value.

These goals and roles are based on our analysis of current community sentiment, and we invite fellow delegates to weigh in:

  • Do these goals reflect what Scroll should prioritize at this stage?

  • Are there any important goals missing?

  • Are there roles or contribution areas that governance should recognize but are currently overlooked?

  • How can we measure the impact of each role to ensure it creates meaningful value for Scroll?

6 Likes
7

Hi there,
Thank you @Curia for keeping this conversation going (and for nudging me to give feedback :folded_hands:).

I believe that a good next step would be to align ourselves in defining:

What Makes a Role?

Here a few core elements (which I bring from Sociocracy)

  • Purpose: Why this role exists or its “reason for being.”
  • Accountabilities: What this role is expected to do, and what success looks like.
  • Required Skills/Badges: The specific capabilities or proof-of-work needed to do the job well.
  • (Optional) Domains or Policies: what the role can manage exclusively (if anything).

I would also like to highlight something I have learned from this experience:

the fewer roles, the better.

Whenever possible, it’s better to have fewer roles used across different programs or initiatives, rather than creating separate roles that are almost identical.

Why?

  • It’s easier to compare and refine across contexts.
  • It simplifies onboarding and compensation tracking.
  • It helps contributors focus on mastering one clear area.

Considering the above, and taking on the roles proposed by Curia (:raising_hands:), but maintaining the separation by systems that I have been working on, here is a list of potential roles to be created:

Proposed Roles

System 1 – Operational Roles

1) Program Coordinator

  • Purpose: Keep programs moving on time and on budget.
  • Accountabilities: Timeline tracking, bounty pipeline oversight, contributor support.
  • Skills: Project management, basic Notion/Sheet fluency, async coordination.

2) Growth

  • Purpose: Drive adoption, stickiness, and usage.
  • Accountabilities: Design/adapt incentives, identify growth levers, test ecosystem bets.
  • Skills: Strategic thinking, ecosystem research.

3) Biz-Dev

  • Purpose: Support partnerships and grantee success.
  • Accountabilities: Maintain ecosystem relationships, source aligned contributors.
  • Skills: Communication, ecosystem fluency, partnership-building.

4) Content

  • Purpose: Translate Scroll governance into engaging narratives.
  • Accountabilities: Write updates, clarify proposals, shape educational content.
  • Skills: Writing, protocol literacy, storytelling.

5) Community

  • Purpose: Connect governance to local communities.
  • Accountabilities: Host calls, gather insights, grow local nodes.
  • Skills: Event coordination, local insight, trust-building.

6) Analyst

  • Purpose: Turn raw data into useful signals.
  • Accountabilities: Build dashboards, track ROI, share key trends.
  • Skills: SQL/Dune/Flipside, research, data storytelling.

System 2 – Support Roles

7) Weaver

  • Purpose: Weave together team culture and coordination.
  • Accountabilities: Facilitate meetings, steward rituals, foster trust.
  • Skills: Group facilitation, async comms, peer support.

8) Scribe

  • Purpose: Keep Scroll’s memory clear and accessible.
  • Accountabilities: Document key meetings and learnings, publish reports.
  • Skills: Note-taking, summarization, transparency-minded writing.

System 4 – Delegates

Remember that a delegate may choose to fulfill only the basic responsibilities of a verified delegate (and it would be good to define what those are).

9) Verified Delegate

  • Purpose: Represent token holders in voting and long-term guidance.
  • Accountabilities: Vote on proposals, give feedback, flag new governance needs.
  • Skills/Badges: Voting history, forum activity, or prior governance experience.

Accountability & Security as Councils, not Roles

I believe Accountability (System 3 - Auditing) and Security should be handled via Councils, not individual contributor roles. Both ‘Watchdogs’ and ‘Security Reviewers & Auditors’ would fall there.

why?

  • These areas require a higher degree of neutrality, peer review, and multi-sig trust.
  • Councils allow for collective deliberation and rotating seats, which improves oversight and reduces risk of capture.
  • Roles like Scribe can feed into these councils through documentation and reporting, but should not replace their judgment or accountability.

@Curia
Curious to hear your thoughts. Do any of these roles feel redundant? Are we missing one that’s critical?

Let’s keep iterating together.

3 Likes
8

Hey @Curia — thanks for continuing this discussion. From my perspective, as we think about how delegates can best support Scroll’s success, it’s important to be grounded in the direction that L2 protocols are heading, which looks like a world of many interoperable chains. The question then becomes how the DAO can meaningfully support Scroll’s growth and usage within that context.

In practice, this means verified delegates should be deeply embedded in the ecosystem. They should be actively engaging with builders, testing products, and providing direct feedback to the product team. This also includes attending and hosting events, and representing Scroll at meetups, hackathons, and conferences.

Furthermore, verified delegates should have a strong understanding of Scroll’s products and tech stack, and play an active role in reviewing grants and vetting projects to help source high-quality builders and teams. More broadly, delegates should consistently help attract new builders into the Scroll ecosystem while ensuring existing builders have the support they need to grow, compete, and ultimately succeed.

As far as measurable KPIs for verified delegates, we could track activities such as product feedback, builder conversations and conversions, grant reviews, events attended or hosted, builders onboarded, and features shipped as a result of delegate input.

2 Likes
9

Thank you @Curia . This really hits at the right place, and I am glad someone finally paused to ask the bigger question before jumping into incentives.

What stood out to me most is the shift from “how do we reward delegates” to “what is Scroll actually trying to achieve next.” That framing matters a lot. If token strength and real user adoption are the north stars for 2026, then governance cannot stay stuck at counting votes alone. It has to reward work that actually moves people, builders, and liquidity toward the network.

The four pillars feel grounded in reality. Ecosystem vitality especially reflects where Scroll is today. Growth does not come from funds alone. It comes from clear stories, trusted local voices, strong builder support, and honest feedback loops. I also like how education, events, grants, and product testing are treated as real contributions, not side work.

The focus on data and accountability is another strong point. Decisions backed by clear numbers tend to age better than decisions driven by noise or popularity. Same goes for the watchdog role. Treasuries need eyes, not just signatures.

If I had one suggestion, it would be to think early about simple ways to measure impact without killing motivation. Not everything valuable shows up instantly on a dashboard, but rough signals are better than none.

Overall, this feels like a thoughtful step toward grown-up governance. Clear goals first, then clear roles, then fair incentives. I am looking forward to seeing how others react and what gets refined from here.

2 Likes
10

Thanks @alexsotodigital for the thoughtful breakdown. We strongly agree with the principle of “fewer, clearer roles” to ensure better coordination and avoid the fragmentation that often plagues DAO governance.

We think the framework you proposed maps well to the four pillars we previously outlined. To make this more actionable and easier to operate, we’d suggest framing this into two complementary delegate incentive tracks, aligned with the structure of the new Scroll governance.

Screenshot 2025-12-23 at 15.52.36
Screenshot 2025-12-23 at 15.52.36972×618 84.8 KB

Screenshot 2025-12-23 at 15.52.20
Screenshot 2025-12-23 at 15.52.201136×920 76.2 KB

1. Delegate Contribution Program

This program is meant to align delegate work beyond voting and forum discussion with Scroll’s protocol goals. In practice, this would cover what you defined as System 1 (Operational Roles) and System 2 (Support Roles).

The key idea is that delegates can opt into clearly defined roles based on their expertise, with explicit purposes and accountabilities tied to measurable outcomes for Scroll.

We believe the following roles you outlined fit naturally here:

These roles directly support execution, coordination, data, storytelling, and ecosystem growth, areas where delegates can create measurable value without overlapping heavily with core teams.
We also agree with the approach to handling auditing & security related issue. Handling Security Reviewers and Auditors through a Council provides necessary oversight. In this framing, the Scribe and Analyst roles act as the “eyes and ears” for those councils, providing the transparent data and documentation needed for effective oversight.

2. Governance Contribution Recognition (GCR)

This track is for those representing token holders through active participation in the forum and voting, with rewards distributed retrospectively. It would primarily apply to Delegates and Verified Delegates.

As @404Gov highlighted, Verified Delegates shouldn’t just be just voters. They should be deeply embedded in the ecosystem, understanding the tech stack, helping vet grants, and providing product feedback. We believe contributors who have been actively supporting Scroll over the past year, and consistently help shape Scroll, should naturally become Verified Delegates. We envision the GCR evolving into a retrospective reward system for those providing this high-level guidance.

Regarding measurement, we agree with both @404Gov and @GozmanGonzalez that it should focus on activities with meaningful impact, while keeping things simple.

We believe the next step is to finalize the roles. We want to ensure this structure serves everyone. In addition, we are especially interested in hearing from the @Juansito and the Scroll Foundation on which of these roles they feel would most effectively complement their current 2026 workstreams.

To gauge the general sentiment among fellow delegates, we’ve set up a preliminary poll:

Which specialized roles do you feel are most critical to launch first in the Delegate Contribution Program?
  • Program Coordinator
  • Growth
  • Biz-Dev
  • Content
  • Community
  • Analyst
  • Weaver
  • Scribe
0 voters

We look forward to hearing more perspectives, especially regarding any roles we might have missed or how we can best measure the impact of these contributions.

4 Likes
11

Thanks for keeping the conversation going @Curia and @alexsotodigital. This is a fantastic structural pivot. Adopting the Sociocracy model (Purpose, Accountabilities, Skills) immediately clears up the ambiguity regarding “what exactly does this person do?”

I strongly agree with the philosophy of “fewer roles, better defined.” However, I have a specific thought on how these proposed roles interact with the strategic goals we discussed:

The “Weaver” & “Scribe” distinction While I see the value in System 2 (Support), we should ask if “Weaver” is a distinct role or a capability expected of the Program Coordinator.

  • If we are aiming for “fewer roles,” could the coordination of team culture and meetings sit with the Program Coordinator?
  • However, keeping Scribe distinct is valuable, impartial documentation is a full-time job in a DAO and shouldn’t be an afterthought for a Project Manager.

My only major advise is to ensure the “Growth” and “Biz-Dev” roles have very clear boundaries, as “incentive design” (Growth) often overlaps with “partnership building” (Biz-Dev).

Excited to see this refined further.

3 Likes
12

Hi there @LifeofDan-EL. :waving_hand:
Glad to see you joining this conversation.

My position is that the ‘@program coordinator’ has a (internal) ‘program’ focus, while the ‘@weaver’ seeks inter-program collaboration. And that distinction is worthwhile.

It should be noted that both roles can be filled by the same person. The distinction is only to define the ‘area of responsibility’. Ideally, there may be a different coordinator for each program and a single ‘weaver’ for the entire organization.

That said, I agree it might be a low-priority role that can be activated as the need to break down silos becomes apparent.

1 Like
13

Okay, thanks for the clarification. That makes sense.