I think this is the right positioning that this council should have. A clear inclusive process + a “final proposal” decision power.
Hi, @coffee-crusher !
Yes, having 2 paid council members would increase the costs.
So, instead of one person = * 10k SCR per month * 6 months = 60k SCR [this assumes an SCR price of $0.3 - to be revised once approved to reflect market rates], this amount would double to 120k SCR (to be revised based on the market price).
120,000 out of 1,500.000 still leaves a good portion of the budget to be used for purposes listed in the proposal, so in my view the budget as in size doesn’t require correction, but the description is, will update and share soon in the final version of the proposal.
2 Likes
Thank you so much for clarifying that. I figured that had to do with the budget allocations, but wanted to ensure that the increased amount didn’t draw away from the impact of the actual activities - grants, the tooling to accomplish the goals, etc.
I look forward to endorsing the final proposal version for a vote recommendation. Thank you for your response!
1 Like
It’s been great seeing this proposal evolve, and the push for a delegate-majority council strengthens the original vision. Beyond the structure, the core idea here has always been about creating a dedicated R&D wing for governance itself.
You can count on our full support for this proposal once it’s formally up for a vote.
1 Like
Hello all, please find updated Proposal below:
(Please, endorse it if you feel it’s ready to be submitted to the September voting cycle. Also please let me know asap if you feel like there are still some changes that aren’t included in the updated proposal).
Changes made:
- Changed the seats from 2 Foundation & 1 delegate/external to 1 Foundation and 2 delegate/external
- Added clarification that it could be a split seat
- Added “Provide recommendations/next steps for future committee members (if this council continues after 6 months) and if it does not continue, then execution/implementation plans for the roadmap.” to the core list of responsibilities.
- Added clarification that “(Foundation will lead a transparent hiring process where applicants will fill out a form where applicants are asked if they are comfortable sharing their full application or at least their name. The results, along with the data consented to be shared will be shared in the post announcing the decision. The DAO will have a 3-business day veto begin once the forum post is made.)” in the selection process.
- Added the proposed definition of the conflict of interest.
- Edited budget to reflect the change of 2 seats hired seats.
The updated proposal below:
Summary
Requested Budget: 1,500,000 SCR
Timeline: 6 Months
This proposal would establish the Governance Council (GC) - a dedicated body responsible for overseeing experimentation and research relating to the future directions of governance at Scroll DAO. The creation of this council would enable much more active research and experimentation towards the dual goal of growing the Scroll network while advancing on the value of progressive decentralization.
Motivation
As Scroll DAO matures, governance processes must evolve to be more resilient, transparent, and participatory. Thus, it is important to have a dedicated to funding new research and experiments that can help define the tools that the DAO will use the, as well as the future direction of the governance architecture overall.
However, a dedicated, representative council is needed to:
- Develop an initial research and development roadmap that the DAO will pursue in regards to governance.
- Work with the governance team to develop a decentralization roadmap.
- Develop and oversee any governance Requests for Proposal, as well as any one off proposals for a grant, experiment, or investment.
- Maintain relationships with and ensure reporting from all relevant projects supported by the Governance Council.
Execution Plan
Council Size
- 3 Members (could be a split seat)
- 1 Scroll Foundation representatives
- 2 delegates or governance professionals with strong relevant experience
Term
- 6 months
Time Commitment
- 10 hours/week per member
Selection Criteria
- Track record in governance participation (e.g., proposal authorship, delegate voting)
- Familiarity with onchain/offchain governance tooling
- Awareness of the landscape of governance research and what can help address the challenges that Scroll DAO faces
- Understanding of DAO legal/regulatory environments
- Cannot be an active member of a budget-disbursing council
The Governance team will lead a transparent hiring process where applicants will fill out a form where applicants are asked if they are comfortable sharing their full application or at least their name. The results, along with the data consented to be shared will be shared in the post announcing the decision. The DAO will have a 3-business day veto begin once the forum post is made.
Core Responsibilities
Core responsibilities would include:
- Produce a governance research & experimentation roadmap, initially for ~6 months
- Produce any relevant RFPs needed
- Provide regular updates on the forum (at least once every two weeks)
- Provide recommendations/next steps for future committee members (if this council continues after 6 months) and if it does not continue, then execution/implementation plans for the roadmap.
- Publish a summary report after at least 3 months
Conflict of Interest
Candidates and members agree to avoid any situations or relationships that could create a conflict of interest during the duration of their term. A conflict of interest is understood as any circumstance where personal, professional, or financial interests may compromise, or appear to compromise, a member’s ability to act impartially and in the best interest of the DAO.
That may include, but is not limited to:
- Acting as, or seeking to become, a service provider in areas that fall within the council’s scope of responsibilities.
- Holding financial interests that could benefit from decisions taken by the council.
- Maintaining professional or personal relationships that may bias judgment or decision-making.
Initial Focus - Research & Experimentation
The initial focus of the council in terms of domains of research & experimentation could entail, but is not limited to:
- How to make it as easy as possible for projects building on Scroll to partake in governance.
- AI + governance (e.g. an RFP for tools such as Event Horizon or x23ai to help ease the cognitive load of governance, building out a KOI instance for Scroll, producing a ‘manifesto for the use of agents in AI’, etc.).
- Exploring the deliberative tooling landscape to better understand which tools can be most helpful to experiment with and for which outcomes.
- Use of futarchy style solutions for specific governance and/or funding decisions.
- Alternatives to Discourse as the primary knowledge base for Scroll.
- Research roadmapping to both articulate the problems we want to work on and to better understand the state of research more broadly.
- How to most effectively operationalize progressive decentralization.
The GC would be responsible for review and, if appropriate, expanding this list and turning it into an initial roadmap.
Approval & Veto
The GC would be able to use it’s budget to approve new governance initiatives. The council would need a 2/3 vote to pass any proposal that uses less than 25% of the total budget, and a 3/3 to pass any proposal that would use more than 25% of the budget. Requests for more budget for the council would need to be put to a full DAO vote.
Once votes conclude, a 3 business day veto window kicks in. During this time, delegates are able to call for a veto on a GC decision if they see fit.
The veto would require a simple majority vote (either in the form of an off-chain vote that can be audited by the community or a formal on-chain vote)
Budget Request
Total Budget: 1.5m SCR
- 10k SCR per month * 6 months = 60k SCR [this assumes an SCR price of $0.3 - to be revised once approved to reflect market rates] x 2 (for two hired seats)= 120k SCR
- Remaining funds can be used for grants, tooling, or other relevant expenses to support the initial goal of the Governance Council.
Evaluation
The primary focus for this council is to:
- Produce a roadmap
- Produce a charter for the council going forward
- Review relevant proposals to fund research and experiments
- Support at one relevant research project
- Conduct at least three relevant experiments
- At least two forum posts a month with short updates on activities
- At least one in-depth report on activities in the first 5 months
- Produce a proposal to extend the GC, as appropriate
Conclusion
This proposal puts forth the idea of forming a Governance Council (GC) with a budget of 1.5m SCR. This council would be require a commitment of roughly 10 hours per week over 6 months. The GC would have the ability to review and then approve or reject proposals directly without requiring a full DAO vote, though the DAO will be able to veto any decisions.
The formation of the GC would ensure that Scroll DAO can become a place for innovative governance, which itself would both attract top talent and make it easier for relevant stakeholders in Scroll (especially projects building on Scroll) to partake in governance.
5 Likes
I fully support and endorse this proposal as a verified delegate for the September voting cycle.
As a point to note, for this Council’s application form (and possibly this would fall under the EOC’s mandate of consistency for all Councils and Working groups) if the form could include a field for the PFP name. As many applicants in previous councils applications only used their IRL name, and it made it hard to match their forum identity to their submissions.
1 Like
Given the incorporation of feedback and the role this new structure shall play in the DAO, we, as verified delegates believe this proposal is ready for a vote.
2 Likes
Happy to see these edits. As a verified delegate, we believe this proposal is ready for a vote.
2 Likes
We endorse the Governance Council proposal for the September cycle. It’s encouraging to see how delegates feedback was incorporated into the final version.
2 Likes
We are a Scroll verified delegate with sufficient voting power and we endorse this proposal to be part of the upcoming voting cycle.
2 Likes
As a verified delegate I endorse this proposal because of the community-weighted council (1 Foundation + 2 external) with COI rules and supermajority checks that ensures most most funds are spent on real experiments, reports often, and has a clear continue-or-close plan.
2 Likes
I endorse the proposal
I am in favor of the formation of governance council. Looking forward to track the outcomes, and hopefully see an increase in the experimentation as well as the council size.
We are voting FOR this proposal.
It is important to have a group dedicated to studying how to improve Scroll’s governance, mainly to prepare for its progressive decentralization.
We support the creation of the Governance Council, and we are available to participate in this group, contributing our knowledge about security and research on DAOs.
2 Likes