Proposal Title
Governance Contribution Recognition (Cycle 2: May - October 2025)
Proposal Type
Governance
Proposal Authors: @Bitblondy, @Seiryuu, @kevinknielsen & Alex Sampson (Proxy)
Summary
Continuation of Delegate Incentives: This proposal launches the second iteration of the Governance Contribution Recognition (GCR) program to reward Scroll DAO delegates for their contributions from May 1st through October 31st, 2025. The 6 months will be split in two parts, with one retroactive period (reward structure included in this proposal) and one future part (rewards to be processed in November/December).
It follows the successful first GCR program that covered Oct 2024 – Apr 2025, extending Scroll’s commitment to recognize governance work. Here, we propose a 4-tier, performance-based scoring system (Tier 4 up to Tier 1). Delegates are scored on multiple criteria (onchain voting rate, forum participation, level of involvement in the Scroll ecosystem, etc.), producing a final performance percentage. Based on their total score, delegates fall into one of four tiers (60–70%, 70–80%, 80–90%, 90–100%), with higher tiers earning greater rewards. This tiered approach attempts to balance between preventing gamification (this prevention can introduce a degree of subjectivity) and distinguishing the quality of contribution.
This proposal requests a total budget of 440,000 SCR for this 6-month period’s rewards (approx. ~$171,000 at $0.39 /SCR). As in the first cycle, rewards are denominated in SCR and allocated to delegates according to their tier following the passage of this proposal.
By financially rewarding meaningful governance work, this program aims to incentivize delegates to remain active and engaged, improve the quality of deliberation, signal that Scroll will continue to value long-term quality governance contribution, and fairly account for as many possible methods of contribution as possible. We expect to retain top-performing delegates and encourage new delegates to contribute meaningfully to Scroll’s governance ecosystem.
Motivation
Having an active and knowledgeable delegate base is a critical step toward building a system of competent, decentralized governance. That said, it’s important for a DAO to recognize governance work and the delegates actively shaping Scroll DAO and its ecosystem. The first GCR program acknowledged this by retroactively rewarding those involved in Scroll’s governance after the DAO’s launch.
We now want to take that further, supporting the work done since then to develop Scroll DAO. This follow-up proposal (GCR Cycle 2) continues that mission for the next evaluation period, ensuring that active delegates are recognized for their efforts and contribute further.
While the first iteration successfully rewarded many contributors, some criteria could be optimized to promote quality over quantity. At the same time, we still want new contributors to be able to join; this proposal aims to strike a balance between inclusivity and standardization.
In this proposal, we refined the criteria to focus on meaningful participation and rewarding depth of engagement more than passive activity. Our aim is to encourage a higher standard of contribution, while also leaving room for future GCR cycles to reward deeper levels of engagement and professionalize the delegate role even further.
In the past five weeks, our Working Group has analyzed multiple delegate incentive models (including Optimism, Arbitum, Uniswap, and ParaSwap, among others). We attempted to aggregate as many learnings as possible across those different ecosystems to inform the criteria design for the GCR Cycle 2. We noted, for instance, that many successful programs set a minimum participation threshold for eligibility and use tiered rewards or points-based systems to differentiate performance. Drawing on these insights, we adapted relevant criteria to Scroll’s context.
Execution
Operational
Program Structure: The GCR Cycle 2 program will evaluate delegate activity over the period May – October 2025 and assign each eligible delegate a performance score (0–100%). This score is based on a weighted combination of criteria that capture both onchain and offchain governance contributions. We then categorize delegates into 4 tiers according to their score (Tier 1 = 90–100%, Tier 2 = 80–89.9%, Tier 3 = 70–79.9%, Tier 4 = 60–69.9%).
Only delegates who score at least 60% will receive a reward. This ensures a basic level of involvement is met, in line with other programs that require ~70% participation to qualify. Delegates below the 60% cutoff (i.e. with minimal engagement in this period) would not be compensated in this cycle.
Required Minimum Criteria: Delegates must meet the following criteria to be eligible for the GCR Cycle 2 program:
- Scroll Verified Delegate: To align incentives among delegates who receive compensation from this program and the broader Scroll DAO, awardees must be Scroll Verified Delegates. This includes having a minimum 2500 SCR delegated to you and having greater than 5 delegators.
- Disclosures & Conflict of Interest: Any party who maintains status as a service provider or otherwise is compensated by the Scroll Foundation for any activities must include a conflict of interest statement in their Agora profile and their delegate thread. Service providers won’t be excluded from being compensated, but they must be transparent about their involvement.
Scoring Criteria: The following criteria (decided by the working group after analyzing multiple DAO programs) will be used to calculate each delegate’s score. Each criterion will be measured quantitatively where possible, with data pulled from on-chain records and the Scroll governance forum. For qualitative factors, the working group performed a good-faith evaluation based on available evidence such as post history. We aim to be as transparent as possible with regards to any qualitative-based decisions. The criteria and their implementation are:
-
Voting Participation: Users that vote on proposals are given a percentage score equal to the percentage of proposals that they voted on during this time period. Users that voted 8/11 proposals, for example, are given a score of 72.72% for this criterion. We recognize that new delegates entering Scroll governance (e.g. through the Delegate Accelerator) may not have a deep voting history.
- Weight and rationale: High. This criterion ensures reliability in participation. Delegates who voted in all proposals in this cycle get full marks for this category, whereas missing votes will reduce the score proportionally.
-
Rationale Rate: Users who post rationale for their votes on the governance forum are, similar to voting participation, given a proportional percentage score equal to percent of rationales that they posted. Users that posted 8/11 rationales in this time period would score 72.72% for this criterion.
- Weight and rationale: Moderate. We reward delegates who not only vote, but also provide context or reasoning for their votes. That said, we did not want to over-index on posting rationale. It is a valuable part of decentralized governance, but we didn’t wish to heavily punish users who do not take part in this aspect of governance.
-
Forum Engagement (Discussion & Feedback): Using Curia’s Forum Score, users are assigned a percentage score that is calculated through a formula which represents their total contributions to the Scroll forums. Users that earn a Forum Score of 82, for example, are given a score of 82% for this criterion.
- Weight and rationale: Moderate. This metric measures constructive contributions on the Scroll governance forum. This includes meaningful forum posts such as analyzing proposals, offering feedback during the ideation phase, and engaging in discussions that shape governance outcomes. Rather than focusing on raw post numbers, Curia scores contributions higher if the user is an active participant that offers real value to the DAO. Curia’s Forum Score consists of three parts: Proposal Score (PS), Engagement Score (ES), and Activeness Score (AS). Read Curia’s proposal to learn more. Although we are not including a dedicated Curia dashboard in this budget request (see an example here), this one-time integration leaves that as an option for future GCR cycles.
The next two categories capture other positive contributions that aren’t covered above.
-
Community Involvement (Call Attendance): This category is only used for the second payout of GCR Cycle 2. Due to a change in the Google Meet transcripts, we were not able to track the call participants from May to August. The gov team will introduce another method of tracking call attendance in the near future, and this criterion will be considered for the second payout.
- Weight and rationale: Low. While we reduced the emphasis on call attendance (responding to feedback that active contribution matters more than just being present), we still provide a small bonus to delegates who regularly attended Scroll’s governance calls.
-
Community Involvement (Workshops & Ecosystem Initiatives): Delegates who participated in at least one workshop and at least one Harmonica session were given a 100% score in this category. Delegates who participated in either one workshop or Harmonica session were given a 75% score.
- Weight and rationale: Low. While we want to incentivize delegates of Scroll to get more involved in further ecosystem initiatives, we don’t want to weight their importance too heavily.
Tier Definitions and Rewards: All the above criteria are compiled into a single performance score for each delegate. The scoring process was handled objectively: the working group used on-chain data for voting history, Curia for forum engagement, and internal tracking sheets (e.g. workshop attendance) to calculate each component for every delegate. To illustrate, an exemplary top-performing delegate might have 95% vote participation, detailed rationales for each vote, multiple quality forum contributions, and attended most ecosystem initiatives, yielding a score in the ~95% range (Tier 1).
Rewards are funded entirely in SCR tokens from the Scroll DAO treasury (as was done previously). The Tiers are relative to each other (i.e., a Tier 4 delegate will receive 60% of the compensation of a Tier 1 delegate).
- Tier 1 (Score ≥ 90%). These delegates demonstrated near-complete participation and consistently high-quality engagement.
- Tier 2 (Score 80–89.9)%. These delegates are moderately active and met most criteria with strong performance.
- Tier 3 (Score 70–79.9%). These delegates are adequately active and participated to a satisfactory level (e.g. decent voting record and some forum/ecosystem initiative involvement, but shows room to improve in consistency or depth.
- Tier 4 (Score 60–69.9%). These delegates met the basic eligibility requirements, but had limited engagement beyond that.
Calculation
Final Score (first payout)
Each criterion was scored as a percentage from 0–100:
- VP = Voting Participation
- RR = Rationale Rate
- FE = Forum Engagement
- WS = Workshops / Ecosystem Initiatives
Weights: High = 0.8, Moderate = 0.5, Low = 0.3.
For this half-cycle, we use: VP (0.8), RR (0.5), FE (0.5), and WS (0.3).
Final Score (FS) = [(0.8 x VP) + (0.5 x RR) + (0.5 x FE) + (0.3 x WS)] / [0.8 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.3] = [(0.8 x VP) + (0.5 x RR) + (0.5 x FE) + (0.3 x WS)] / 2.1
Example FS Calculations:
A perfect-scoring delegate would receive a FS of 100:
[(0.8 x 100) + (0.5 x 100) + (0.5 x 100) + (0.3 x 100)] / 2.1 = [80 + 50 + 50 + 30] / 2.1 = 100
For a delegate who scored 100% for VP, 75% for RR, 75% for FE, and 50% for WS, their FS would be calculated as follows:
[(0.8 x 100) + (0.5 x 75) + (0.5 x 75) + (0.3 x 50)] / 2.1 = [80 + 37.5 + 37.5 + 15] / 2.1 = 80.95
This delegate would fall into Tier 2.
Final Score (second payout)
The same base formula from the first payout will be used, but with the added Community Call (CC) criterion.
For this half-cycle, we use: VP (0.8), RR (0.5), FE (0.5), WS (0.3), and CC (0.3).
Final Score (FS) = [(0.8 x VP) + (0.5 x RR) + (0.5 x FE) + (0.3 x WS) + (0.3 x CC)] / [0.8 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.3 + 0.3] = [(0.8 x VP) + (0.5 x RR) + (0.5 x FE) + (0.3 x WS) + (0.3 x CC)] / 2.4
Example FS Calculation (second payout):
A perfect-scoring delegate would receive a FS of 100:
[(0.8 x 100) + (0.5 x 100) + (0.5 x 100) + (0.3 x 100) + (0.3 x 100)] / 2.4 = [80 + 50 + 50 + 30 + 30] / 2.4 = 100
Personnel & Resources
The execution of the GCR Cycle 2 will primarily involve the Governance Contribution Reward Working Group in collaboration with the Scroll Foundation’s governance team.
- Working Group (Authors): Bitblondy, Seiryuu, and Proxy will oversee the final scoring and allocation selection process. They have already conducted research and gathered data as part of drafting this proposal. Post-approval, they will double-check all criteria computations, incorporate any community feedback, and prepare the final list of reward recipients with amounts.
- Scroll Foundation: The Scroll Foundation’s governance team will assist with fund disbursement once the proposal passes. The team also assisted in setting up the working group’s operations and occasionally attended the group’s meetings.
Financial
This 6-month cycle is split in two parts, allocating 70,000 SCR per month:
- May - August (4 months retro): 280,000 SCR
- September - October (2 months, with the option to extend the mandate until December, see “open questions to delegates”): 140,000 SCR
The total request is 440,000 SCR. The SCR allocation per Tier will be posted once we have the data finalized with the total number of delegates per category.
- __ SCR total for Tier 1 delegates
- __ SCR total for Tier 2 delegates
- __ SCR total for Tier 3 delegates
- __ SCR total for Tier 4 delegates
- ~20,000 SCR for Curia Integration / one-time payment ($7500)
Any funds that are unused will remain in the treasury. There are no other costs associated with this proposal.
Please note: Eligible delegates will have to complete KYC/KYB in order to receive compensation. The distribution is not executed automatically. The verification is valid for 6 months; participants of the last retro payment in May won’t need to repeat it for now.
Initial Breakdown
This is a preliminary breakdown for the first (retroactive) payout of GCR Cycle 2, covering May 1st - August 31st, based on the rules above. A second breakdown will follow after the end of the iteration in November or December.
Please note: These are not the final scores. The forum score (accounting for ~25% of the weight), will be provided by Curia by the end of August. We should be able to share the final scores and Tiers before the September voting cycle starts.
Here is a Google sheet version. Feel free to double-check the data and message us if you have any concerns or questions. If you cannot find yourself in the list, please check if you are a verified delegate and make sure your Agora profile is linked in your forum account or delegate thread.
Evaluation
We will measure the success of the GCR Cycle 2 program by the following outcomes and metrics. The evaluation will be posted to the forums together with the compensation of the 2nd half of this iteration in Nov/Dec, after the conclusion of Cycle 2, to help inform the design of Cycle 3.
- The # of delegates voting on proposals
- The # of delegates engaging constructively in the forums
- The # of delegates participating in ecosystem initiatives including Harmonica and Negation Game.
- The # of delegates voting on more than 50% of proposals
- The # increase in delegate threads on the forum
- The average # of quality comments a proposal or significant discussion gets
- The # of attendees in governance calls
Open questions for the DAO
We are looking forward to your feedback, particularly on the following aspects:
- Timeframe: With the working group’s mandate covering 6 months, the second half of this GCR iteration would end on October 31. Alternatively, the period could be extended to 8 months, ending December 31, with the budget adjusted accordingly.
- Incentive criteria: Do you find the selected criteria reasonable? Please share any alternative options or relevant data sources.
- Tiered compensation: Do you agree with the proposed approach and the 60% cutoff? We support having a minimum participation standard in the GCR. Given that this iteration includes two payout periods, new delegates would still have the opportunity to join in the second half.
- Budget: Do you feel the proposed compensation is reasonable? We based it on the budget from the retro, while also considering the comparatively low participation barriers in the first iteration.
- Evaluation criteria: Do you have suggestions for additional KPIs?
Conclusion
The Governance Contribution Reward Working Group proposes a structure and criteria for GCR Cycle 2. GCR Cycle 2 is a refined, tiered delegate incentive program to reward May-October 2025 governance contributions and to set the stage for sustained delegate engagement. We have preserved the spirit of the first GCR initiative, recognizing that “governance is work” and should be compensated while incorporating community feedback and cross-DAO best practices to improve fairness and impact. Key changes include a performance tier system (to reward quality over quantity and discourage gaming) and updated criteria that emphasize active, transparent, and thoughtful governance participation. By approving this proposal, Scroll DAO will disburse up to 440,000 SCR in rewards to those who have actively stewarded the protocol’s governance in the past five months.
The working group appreciates the community’s trust in allowing us to craft this proposal. We have strived to make the process and outcome as transparent and merit-based as possible.