CoCreation Sprint - Naming Schemes

Governance Iterations Co-Creation Cycle
1

Help me find a better name for:

  • Execution Council
  • Accountability Council
  • Support Squad

What are your ideas?

1 Like
2

Our vote is “Governance Facilitators” for the execution council. Keeps things simple and easy to understand

3 Likes
3

Here are some other alternatives for the “Execution Council” (a.k.a. Voldemort):

  • Governance Contributors
  • DAO Operators
  • Governance Stewards
  • Implementation Team
  • Operation Specialists
  • Operations Committee
  • Operations Group
  • Operations Unit

“Governance Facilitators” doesn’t sound bad, but (as a facilitator myself) I think it could be confusing in terms of the type of work they do…

2 Likes
Co-Creation Sprint - Governance Structure Discussion
4

I propose

Execution Council - The Scholars

Accountability Council - The Scribes

Support Squad - The Scrollers

2 Likes
5

My propose:

Executive Council

  • Delivery Council

  • Implementation Council

  • Protocol Operations Council

Accountability Council

  • Stewardship Council

  • Protocol Guardians Council

Support Squad

  • Contributor Operations Team
1 Like
6

@Juansito can you clarify please what is the role of the Execution Council? And is it a group of a few selected individuals only or is it broader and more inclusive? Sorry in advance if this is alreasy stated somewhere.

7

Hello everyone,

Thanks to everyone who made suggestions on this thread. Following our recent discussions, I’d like to share an updated proposal for the naming and framing of key organizational structures within the DAO, with the goal of improving clarity and reducing confusion around roles and authority.

Operations Committee (formerly Execution Council)

A DAO-elected, time-bound operational working group responsible for coordinating governance processes, managing the DAO agenda, executing approved programs, and ensuring delivery against mandates set by the Scroll Foundation.

This renaming better reflects the strictly operational nature of this working group and avoids the ambiguity introduced by the term “council.”

Accountability Committee (formerly Accountability Council)

A DAO-elected, time-bound oversight working group responsible for reviewing DAO operations, evaluating mandate execution, and publishing accountability and transparency reports.

The primary focus of this committee is to establish and maintain accountability structures across DAO operations, committees, and delegate activity. Its role is both to properly surface the impact generated by the DAO and to ensure appropriate oversight in coordination with the Scroll Foundation.

Delegate Contribution Program (formerly Support Squad)

Based on the current organizational structure and the definitions discussed during our calls, the Support Squad is better positioned as a contribution layer rather than a fixed group of roles. As such, I propose renaming it to the Delegate Contribution Program.

This initiative represents an open contribution layer for delegates, enabling structured incentives for impactful work beyond voting and participation in proposal discussions, such as content creation, documentation, process improvement, business development, and community engagement.

As a program, this will require operational coordination. Initially, it can be managed by the Operations Committee. Over time, we should evaluate the need for a dedicated Delegate Contribution Coordinator role to oversee the program and serve as a primary interface with delegates. This will also require adjusting budget allocations to reserve a defined portion of the delegate incentives budget specifically for this program.

Happy to hear any abstentions to this new naming scheme and definition of these entities. We will continue using these names for the rest of the Co-Creation Sprint cycle. The name structure and definitions can be revised at a later time within the DAO.

4 Likes
8

Thanks @Juansito for the clarity on the naming shift, especially moving away from “Council” to more functional terms like Committee and Program. That definitely helps.

That said, I’d like to surface a tension regarding the Operations Committee. It’s currently described as a

This sounds extremely close to what individual contributors within the Delegate Contribution Program would already be doing, especially roles like biz-dev, community, content, etc.

So I’m left wondering:

  • What “operations” would the Operations Committee execute that wouldn’t fall under scoped roles within the Delegate Contribution Program?

  • If their function is primarily supervisory or meta-coordination, is it worth electing a group for that, instead of assigning that work to capable contributors via roles?

  • If they are also executors, why not treat them as operational roles (with defined accountabilities and skill requirements), rather than bundling execution under an elected group where popularity can outweigh qualifications?

One first step is to clarify whether the Operations Committee is:

  1. Truly executing DAO programs (in which case they should just be structured as operational roles under the Delegate Contribution Program), or
  2. Coordinating the execution and communications among contributors; which in my opinion would make them more like a Support/Coordination layer (which was the initial reason why the Support Squad came into being in the first place. :sweat_smile:).

Do you see why this is confusing to me?
I’d really love to better understand the rationale behind this division.

In my opinion, we should minimize elected groups to where deliberative or oversight functions are really needed (like the Accountability Committee), and let most execution flow through scoped roles and contribution programs.

Do others see additional nuances I’m missing? :face_with_spiral_eyes:

1 Like
9

Heyyyy @Juansito. I really like the direction this is taking, because names quietly shape how people behave.

The shift to Operations Committee feels especially right. It says exactly what the group is there to do, which is to keep things moving and make sure decisions turn into action. Dropping the word “council” removes a lot of unnecessary weight and clears up who sets direction versus who carries it out.

The Accountability Committee also lands well. Framing it around oversight and reporting makes its purpose easy to grasp, even for someone new to the DAO. I appreciate that it focuses on surfacing real impact and not just checking boxes. That kind of clarity builds trust over time.

Renaming the Support Squad to the Delegate Contribution Program is probably the strongest move here. It reflects how people already contribute in practice. Not everyone adds value the same way, and treating this as an open contribution layer feels more honest and inclusive. It also makes incentives feel earned rather than assigned.

I also like the idea of starting with the Operations Committee managing this, then reassessing later. It shows flexibility without overengineering things too early.

Overall, this feels like a clean step toward reducing confusion and setting healthier expectations. I am comfortable with these names for this sprint and curious to see how they play out