# Co-Creation Sprint Q4 2025: Scroll DAO 2.0 **URL:** \ **Category:** General\ **Tags:** co-creation-cycle-1, announcement\ **Created:** [December 2, 2025, 4:35am UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323 "2025-12-02T04:35:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Juansito](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Juansito](https://forum.scroll.io/u/Juansito)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2025, 4:35am UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/1 "2025-12-02T04:35:31Z")
Hi everyone, ## **tldr** We’re launching a December Co-Creation Sprint to finalize the main change categories for the 2026 Scroll DAO design. The Governance Council has already completed extensive research and prepared solid proposals for each category. December will be the month for community review, debate, and refinement. A consolidated governance proposal will be published on January 1st, 2026 for a DAO-wide vote. ## **Purpose of the Sprint** Throughout the past cycle, multiple structural and operational changes were explored for the next version of the Scroll DAO. The Governance Council has drafted proposals and recommendations for each area, and this sprint is intended to: - Discuss and refine the proposed changes - Gather community feedback and alignment - Resolve open questions before final consolidation - Produce a single, coherent DAO design for 2026 The aim is to close the year with clarity and alignment across all governance areas. ## **Categories We Will Review** The sprint will cover the main change areas identified during the design research: 1. **Delegate Framework & Requirements** 2. **Governance Mechanisms** 3. **Governance Org Structure** 4. **Ongoing Programs** 5. **Implementation Roadmap** These categories already have research and proposed models prepared by the Governance Council that will be shared for review during the sprint. ## **Sprint Sessions** To make this process accessible to everyone, we will host four sessions per week: - **Mondays:** AM + PM session - **Fridays:** AM + PM session All session links are available in the Governance Calendar: 📅 **[https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0?cid=Y181YzYyZGI5YmEyOWVjOGIzOWFiN2JlMWJiYzc1MGIzMzNjNTU0YmIxNDRmNWJhYjI4Y2VmYTU1YmZhNGE4NGIzQGdyb3VwLmNhbGVuZGFyLmdvb2dsZS5jb20](https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0?cid=Y181YzYyZGI5YmEyOWVjOGIzOWFiN2JlMWJiYzc1MGIzMzNjNTU0YmIxNDRmNWJhYjI4Y2VmYTU1YmZhNGE4NGIzQGdyb3VwLmNhbGVuZGFyLmdvb2dsZS5jb20)** These are working sessions focused on reviewing proposals, addressing open items, and moving each category toward final consensus. ## **Outcome** By December 31, we expect to complete: - A fully refined and community-reviewed 2026 Scroll DAO organizational design - A consolidated governance proposal that will be posted for voting on January 1st, 2026 Your participation during this sprint will shape how the Scroll DAO operates throughout 2026. ---
**Author:** ![Juansito](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Juansito](https://forum.scroll.io/u/Juansito)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2025, 6:15am UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/2 "2025-12-07T06:15:46Z")
# **Co-Creation Sprint → Introduction Session** Presentation: [CoCreation Sprint Call #1 - Dec 5, 2025 - Google Slides](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12j9vP49hVSmjEbL6YY8-2wAXuVgUmcBqZJHZhBuLaFc/edit?slide=id.g3adae6f0bdd_0_120#slide=id.g3adae6f0bdd_0_120) - Call #1 - Call Recording: [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W4\_wm0NcY6DxVWC8jGTTUq\_HXmUJO7ab/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W4_wm0NcY6DxVWC8jGTTUq_HXmUJO7ab/view?usp=sharing) - Gemini Notes: [CoCreation Sprint PM Session - 2025/12/04 17:56 CST - Notes by Gemini - Google Docs](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iitm8Sm9K_lfF0zfi_fmkGp5fL5FHlHFSxhAuaxOMT0/edit?tab=t.j0zlrd4dat5) - Call #2 - Call Recording: [https://drive.google.com/file/d/10Oh0W5ZgJYS9wgwtkf05PFk5yFXjCwzn/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/10Oh0W5ZgJYS9wgwtkf05PFk5yFXjCwzn/view?usp=sharing) - Gemini Notes: [CoCreation Sprint AM Session - 2025/12/05 08:50 CST - Notes by Gemini - Google Docs](https://docs.google.com/document/d/13AvRclHCHtmbxTU75xPyzmjNjP2xOik_ZqS0UZwbH2k/edit?usp=sharing) **Update on Our First Co-Creation Sprint Session** Thanks to everyone who joined our first discussion session last week. Here’s a quick recap of what we covered and what’s already emerging as priorities from the community. **1. Big Picture Takeaways** The main theme of the call was clear: before diving into mechanics, we need to agree on **what the DAO is trying to achieve**. Several delegates pointed out that without shared goals, it’s hard to evaluate proposals, budgets, or structures. This will be a central focus going forward. **2. Key Topics from the Call** **Clear DAO Goals** Participants want the DAO to define a few core objectives (growth, ecosystem health, sustainability, etc.) that guide all decisions. These should also be reflected in the updated Constitution. **Better Role Definitions** There was strong interest in clarifying how the Foundation, DAO, Labs, councils, and other groups relate and split responsibilities. People want predictable ownership and fewer bottlenecks. **Improve Execution Speed** A lot of feedback centered on making things move faster: clearer mandates, cleaner proposal flows, and more operational support. **Treasury & Budget Clarity** Delegates asked for a more transparent treasury strategy, clearer spending buckets, and consistent budget cycles so programs can plan ahead. **Program Alignment** We reviewed the program architecture (community budget, Local Nodes, Creator Fund, ecosystem support). The suggestion was to map all programs directly to DAO goals and set standard KPIs and review cycles. **3. Extra Notes From the Docs** Across the note sets, a few more ideas stood out: - Tighten mandate structures for councils - Better definition of proposal types and routing - Create a long-term governance roadmap - Consolidate decision-making guidelines in one place All of these will feed into the drafts for upcoming sessions. **4. Mentimeter Priorities** Mentimeter Survey: [Introduction Session Sentiment Overview - Mentimeter](https://www.menti.com/alceu44p194n) On Friday, delegates highlighted these as top priorities moving forward: - Define clear high-level goals for the DAO - Clarify Foundation/DAO/Labs relationships - Improve treasury strategy and budget clarity - Speed up execution - Build a strategy with metrics for user growth - Update the DAO Constitution These will guide what we focus on next. **5. What’s Next** We’ll keep deep-diving into each governance area throughout the sprint, sharing early drafts and gathering feedback as we go. Morning and evening sessions continue every Monday and Friday. Feel free to drop thoughts or resources here in the thread, everything helps shape the final DAO 2.0 roadmap. ---
**Author:** ![HumbertoBesso](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dec6dc/32.png) [@HumbertoBesso](https://forum.scroll.io/u/HumbertoBesso)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2025, 3:28pm UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/3 "2025-12-09T15:28:17Z")
Thanks Juan for sharing. A suggestion: Post a screenshot with the Mentimeter results. The link you shared is to fill the survey, which as it is open people might enter and alter the results, therefor a snapshot is important to support the arguments addressed in this post. ---
**Author:** ![alexsotodigital](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/forum.scroll.io/alexsotodigital/32/325_2.png) [@alexsotodigital](https://forum.scroll.io/u/alexsotodigital)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2025, 8:24pm UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/4 "2025-12-10T20:24:44Z")
# Tension-Driven Governance: _Balancing Efficiency & Capture Resistance_ I’m sharing some ideas that address some of the questions and reflections that have emerged in the co-creation sessions so far. Proceed with an open mind. 💫 > _“No viable organism is either centralized or decentralized. It is both at once, in different dimensions.”_ > _Stafford Beer- VSM_ Traditional DAOs often default to either slow, all-inclusive voting or tightly centralized decision-making. Both extremes carry risks: sluggish responsiveness on one hand, or loss of community legitimacy on the other. **A tension-driven model offers a middle path.** 🌵 It centers governance around actual, felt needs (raised as “tensions”) that can then be processed through predefined roles. This is how living organisms manage to thrive in complexity, and could enable Scroll to move quickly on real issues while building in resilience and accountability. 🐎 ### Structural Overview: Five Functional Layers Inspired by Stafford Beer’s Viable System Model (VSM), this architecture splits responsibilities across five interacting layers: - **System 1: Contributors** / focused on direct execution of work (research, comms, dev, growth, etc.) - **System 2: Support Squad** _(OpCo style)_ / roles that enable smooth coordination (docs, onboarding, synthesis, facilitation). Check out my post on this: [**Support Squad Pilot (Weaver + Scribe Model)**](https://forum.scroll.io/t/proposal-support-squad-pilot-weaver-scribe-model/1112). - **System 3: Audit Council** / tasked with retroactive funding review, quality assurance, and systemic learning. This is in relation to the [**Execution Oversight Council (EOC)**](https://forum.scroll.io/t/proposal-execution-oversight-council-eoc-formation/1070). - **System 4: Delegates** / act as stewards of the long-term vision and feed back ecosystem signals (by through maintaining a direct link with token holders). - **System 5: Foundation** / final guardians of purpose and constitutional coherence (defining and updating the ‘why’ Scroll exists). This division makes it clear who is responsible for what, and prevents overlaps or gaps in decision-making. ### Verified Delegate Contribution Roles By introducing “Verified Delegate” roles, Scroll is recognizing those who go beyond signaling to actively serve the protocol. **I propose to consider three contribution tracks:** 1. **Verified Delegate Responsibilities:** voting, reviewing proposals and giving quality feedback to iterate them (+ whatever we decide needed) 2. **Operational roles:** Direct project-based work (e.g., leading research, creating content, organizing events, leading programs, onboarding users, driving business development, etc.) 3. **Support roles:** Governance infrastructure (e.g., writing summaries, improving documentation, coordinating working groups, facilitating co-creation and connection spaces) **Verification could be based on** - trackable, simple metrics like proposals authored, Forum participation, number of working group calls joined, etc. - peer to peer vouching and trust based reviewing - token-holder endorsement - time spent within the DAO - **etc.** ### **Audit Council: Oversight by Design** System 3 - Audit would be composed of a Council of (at least) **3** elected individuals serving staggered terms to ensure both continuity and representation. Instead of having ‘contribution roles’ (selected by the Foundation); this would maintain a council that is elected (or nominated) by Token-Holders. This adds a crucial layer of accountability to both the Foundation and delegate-contributor ecosystem (+ certain political-power to token-holding) **The main duties of this council could include:** - Reviewing retro funding and bounty execution - Evaluating proposal outcomes vs. goals - Flagging misalignment or inefficiencies - Providing selection recommendations (optional-transparent input for Foundation decisions) ### **The Tension Flow: End-to-End Coordination** The full tension lifecycle would look like this: 1. A **delegate** , contributor, or token holder surfaces a tension (e.g. poor onboarding experience) as a sensor in the system 🕸 2. A **facilitator** (a.k.a. Support Squad) turns that tension into a: 3. If the proposal raises structural implications, the **Foundation** can object (consent decision making); but must justify based on mission or risk, with support from a neutral facilitator 4. Once approved, the proposal/mission/bounty is executed by **verified contributors** , tracked in a public dashboard. 5. The **Audit Council** reviews outcomes and recommends rewards or process improvements. This model allows Scroll to evolve without needing to constantly rewrite its whole system. ### **Consent-Based Governance & Safeguards** Instead of requiring active approval for every change, proposals move forward by default unless someone raises a reasoned objection. Objections that require escalation (whether due to level of impact or conflicts in reaching consent) can use “Optimistically Approved” decision model where Verified Delegate can veto. This “ **consent** ” model dramatically speeds up governance while still protecting against harmful decisions. **Objections** must be grounded in a clear risk to Scroll’s purpose or function, not just personal disagreement. Facilitators help ensure that all objections are processed constructively. For more info on these, check out [**The Case for Holacracy as a Governance Model for Scroll**](https://forum.scroll.io/t/the-case-for-holacracy-as-a-governance-model-for-scroll/1264). * * * I want to emphasize that this post proposes a long-term design, not a quick fix. These comments are intended as a starting point and a source of inspiration. The beauty of it is that this allows us to begin with something and evolve it iteratively through your different ‘tensions’. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![LifeofDan-EL](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/forum.scroll.io/lifeofdan-el/32/80_2.png) [@LifeofDan-EL](https://forum.scroll.io/u/LifeofDan-EL)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2025, 10:16am UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/5 "2025-12-11T10:16:02Z")
Nice and solid points. > [@alexsotodigital](#): > > **System 2: Support Squad** / roles that enable smooth coordination (docs, onboarding, synthesis, facilitation). Check out my post on this: [**Support Squad Pilot (Weaver + Scribe Model)**](https://forum.scroll.io/t/proposal-support-squad-pilot-weaver-scribe-model/1112). The support squad I envisage is pretty much an Operations Working Group. I think this would help make coordination between councils much better. ---
**Author:** ![ZER8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/8dc957/32.png) [@ZER8](https://forum.scroll.io/u/ZER8)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2025, 12:52am UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/6 "2025-12-13T00:52:19Z")
> [@Juansito](#): > > On Friday, delegates highlighted these as top priorities moving forward: > > - Define clear high-level goals for the DAO > - Clarify Foundation/DAO/Labs relationships > - Improve treasury strategy and budget clarity > - Speed up execution > - Build a strategy with metrics for user growth > - Update the DAO Constitution I believe we should also not make the same mistakes as other DAOs have and not pay attention to audits/outcome analysis/in depth reviews of the councils/grants/initiatives Scroll has funded. Would add this as one of the TOP priorities that is always overlooked by most delegates and organizations overall. ---
**Author:** ![bulbousBullfrog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@bulbousBullfrog](https://forum.scroll.io/u/bulbousBullfrog)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2025, 5:00am UTC](https://forum.scroll.io/t/co-creation-sprint-q4-2025-scroll-dao-2-0/1323/7 "2025-12-13T05:00:47Z")
Yes, I think a problem with DAOs is that they make decisions and the consequences of those decisions only really matter if they come back to haunt. Decisions that had a very positive effect don’t get as much as attention in retrospect, but also decisions that were largely ineffective also continue to slip through. Something similar to what you recommend might help bring attention to what works and what doesn’t after the fact, which is good. The DAO decisions that have little to no impact can hopefully be addressed more proactively with future futarchy-like mechanisms that are already being discussed. But, from the delegate point of view, I agree that it’s important to retroactively assess decisiosns.