Proposal: Scroll DAO Delegate Accelerator Proposal

Proposal Title

ScrollDAO Delegate Accelerator Proposal

Proposal Type

Governance

Proposal Authors: @Nneoma_StableLab and @Kene_StableLab

Simple Summary

This proposal requests $90,000 + 100,000 SCR for a DAO-funded Delegate Accelerator (D/Acc) program that will develop a competent and diverse set of delegates capable of actively governing the Scroll DAO.

Motivation

The Scroll DAO currently has a votable supply of 6,329,000 SCR, compared to the total supply of SCR and the total number of active delegates, there is a strong case to get more SCR delegated to competent delegates over time. While the DAO is still in its earliest stages, developing a delegate training program would create a system for training the DAOs existing delegates that can actively and competently govern the Scroll DAO.

Who is this training for?

  • Existing Scroll DAO delegates looking to refine their governance expertise.
  • Prospective delegates seeking delegation from the foundation after proving governance competency.

Why is this important?

A DAO needs a broad group of delegates to ensure several key principles that are fundamental to its success and sustainability:

  • Decentralization & Distributed Power: A diverse delegate base prevents power consolidation and ensures fair representation of various stakeholders. A governance system dominated by a few individuals creates vulnerabilities such as biased decision-making and potential corruption.
  • Inclusive & Informed Decision-Making: Engaging a wide array of delegates results in well-rounded governance discussions and more informed decisions. A lack of diversity may lead to one-dimensional decisions that do not reflect the views of the broader community.
  • Prevention of Cartels & Governance Manipulation: A robust delegate structure makes it harder for small groups to collude and influence governance for personal gain. A DAO that relies on too few delegates is susceptible to manipulation and self-serving decision-making.
  • Resilience & Risk Mitigation: More engaged and knowledgeable delegates reduce the risk of governance failure due to inactivity, conflicts of interest, or governance takeovers. When a DAO has a dispersed decision-making body, it can better adapt to changes and unforeseen challenges.
  • Expertise & Governance Legitimacy: Delegates with governance expertise add credibility to the DAO, ensuring that proposals are reviewed rigorously and executed effectively. An ecosystem with ill-prepared delegates results in superficial governance processes that fail to achieve any meaningful impact.
  • Greater Engagement & Community Participation: A DAO with strong delegate engagement fosters a sense of ownership among its members, encouraging more community involvement in governance processes. This leads to an active, self-sustaining ecosystem where contributors remain invested in decision-making over longer periods.
  • Mitigating Risks of Governance Capture: Without a broad delegate base, DAOs are at risk of being captured by influential actors who might act in self-interest rather than in the DAO’s best interest. A system with a continuous influx of trained delegates minimizes this risk.
  • Sustainability & Long-Term Viability: Ensuring that new delegates can be continuously onboarded, trained, and incentivized strengthens the DAO’s longevity and adaptability. As governance mechanisms evolve, trained delegates will be better equipped to implement necessary changes and help train new delegates.

Execution

Operational

This proposal focuses on developing the curriculum structure and outlining key aspects for piloting the Delegate Accelerator program at Scroll DAO. Future proposals will address program execution strategies and deployment tools.

Curriculum Overview

The Scroll DAO D/Acc Program will be a 7-week structured cohort, incorporating:

  • Practical Tasks: Governance framework drafting, mock voting, proposal analysis.
  • Gamified Quests: Interactive missions reinforcing skill application.
  • Assessments: Performance-based evaluations to ensure delegate readiness.

Program Format:

  • Live Sessions & Recorded Lectures
  • Written Materials: Breakdowns, required readings, supplementary videos)
  • Assessments & Capstone Projects

Curriculum Structure:

  • Total Levels: 7
  • Program Length: 7 weeks
  • Payouts: Performance-based incentives upon successful completion, in native tokens
  • Badges: Issued as POAPs/NFTs with role advancements at each level.

Curriculum Timeline

  • Week 0: Final Preparations for the 8-week Training Sprint
  • Week 1: Introduction to DAO Governance
    • In this section, we focus on the basics of DAO Governance, distinct Governance Models, and Mechanisms; we examine the purpose of governance and how Governor Contracts have supported decision-making in DAOs since the earliest days of the ecosystem.
  • Week 2: Understanding the Proposal Life Cycle
    • Here, we train delegates on how to engage with the Scroll Governance Process at various points of the proposal life cycle to understand the gaps and opportunities in a proposal while still seeking alignment with the DAO stakeholders, with the main goal of making decisions in the best interest of the DAO.
    • This module teaches delegates how to participate in the Co-Creation Cycle, figuring out the early stages of co-designing a proposal, and how to gather feedback and improve a proposal.
  • Week 3: Supporting Scroll DAO Governance
    • Here at Scroll DAO, we intentionally take time to make the right decisions instead of the fastest ones. To do this, delegates must be able to assess proposals by breaking down why it is essential, why now, and whether there is enough data to support the need for this proposal now.
    • This module also focuses on how to assess the risks and benefits that come with a proposal; this module does this by asking questions such as what the tradeoffs are.
    • This module also focuses on teaching Delegates how to utilize governance to support Local Nodes, Evaluate the milestones of grant proposals, and coordinating with other delegates to perform other supporting functions such translating Governance Documentation and developing educational materials.
  • Week 4: Writing and Submitting Proposals
    • With a firm understanding of how to analyze a proposal, a delegate would now focus on writing a good proposal that addresses the requirements for the earlier module.
  • Week 5: Understanding the Scroll DAOs Offerings
    • It is essential for a Scroll Delegate to understand how Scroll works by understanding how the technology works, delegates can seek opportunities for synergy across the ecosystem.
  • Week 6: Power Dynamics and Strategic Governance
    • In this module, we seek to Understand how your Power is distributed across the Scroll DAOs Ecosystem (Foundation, Grants, Service Providers, and Delegate Power Distribution).
    • Trainees will be taught how to identify potential strategic governance initiatives for DAOs.
  • Week 7: Dispute Resolution Strategies for DAO Governance
    • While working towards making decisions in the best interests of the DAO, conflicts are inevitable; this module focuses on training delegates on providing feedback and sustainably engaging with key stakeholders.

To inform the program design, a survey was conducted within the Scroll community. The key findings revealed that the main barriers to DAO governance include unclear expectations, complex governance structures, and difficulty accessing relevant information. Respondents expressed the strongest interest in learning delegation strategies, proposal writing, and interpreting on-chain data. While most participants were willing to commit to a 7-week program, scheduling flexibility and incentives were key factors for engagement. Additionally, hands-on learning, strategic governance training, and long-term delegate retention strategies were identified as critical components for success.

Survey results can be found here.

Personnel and Resources

Facilitator: The facilitator serves as the program operator, ensuring the smooth execution of the training program. They work closely with curriculum developers and trainees to deliver an impactful learning experience, ensuring resource integrity and overseeing live sessions, assessments, and overall program logistics.

Curriculum Developer: The curriculum developer is responsible for designing and producing the training materials, drawing from their expertise in governance to craft structured content that improves delegate skills. Their goal is to create a comprehensive knowledge base that strengthens the quality of engagement within Scroll DAO governance.

The facilitators and curriculum developers for this program were determined through an opt-in self-nomination process. This process prioritized members who had invested the most time over the past few months co-creating the program through discussions, feedback, and research sessions. The idea for this initiative originated in this governance discussion, and the individuals selected have demonstrated deep engagement and expertise in refining the program’s structure and objectives.

Facilitators:

  • Nneoma Kanu (StableLab) - Nneoma is a Technical Governance Specialist at StableLab, where she designs and implements governance frameworks, strategic initiatives and technical solutions for top protocol DAOs, including Lido, Safe, Uniswap, and Arbitrum, ensuring they resonate with their distinctive visions and objectives. She also oversees multiple ecosystem funding initiatives and serves as a strategic advisor to various project teams in the Web3 ecosystem.
  • Kenechukwu Eze (StableLab) - Kenechukwu Eze is a Protocol Governance Specialist at StableLab. In his role, he focuses on designing and implementing governance systems for prominent decentralised organisations such as Aave DAO, 1inch DAO, Gnosis and Paladin. Before StableLab, Kene contributed to Wildfire DAO as an Operator where he focused on leveraging partnerships to drive growth for DAOs.
  • Ivey (SEEDGov) - Ivey is a governance analyst in SEEDGov, dedicated to design, analysis and implementation of governance programs. Particularly dedicated to Scroll, zkSync, Lido as well as a contributor within Everclear and Paraswap. Before that he was part of Decentraland DAO Facilitation Squad.
  • Tino (SEEDGov) - With previous experience as a web3 researcher and technical writer, Tino has been working for the last two and a half years as a research associate conducting technical assessments of decentralised protocols to determine their level of decentralisation under different regulatory frameworks. Since last January, he has been collaborating with SEEDGov as a governance researcher/analyst on Scroll, ZKsync, Lido, and Gitcoin, designing, analysing, and implementing governance programmes.
  • Kevin Nielsen - Kevin was previously the founder of Boardroom (a company that Agora recently acquired), a platform supporting DAOs and protocols with governance infrastructure and tooling. He has led governance advisory and operation roles and large protocol DAOs and specialized in delegate management and governance workflows in previous roles.
  • Connor McCormick - Connor McCormick has an educational background in business, economics, and computer science. He’s the prior founder of a machine learning computer vision hardware startup where he worked tightly with local, state, and national governments to inform their operations. He has worked professionally in three collective intelligence startups, ranging from climate intelligence (Digital Gaia), to forecasting (Metaculus) and now he is the founder of the Network Goods Institute where he designs tools for collective intelligence and public goods funding. Connor is passionate about creating novel governance and sensemaking frameworks that enable a new era of work and he views Scroll as the perfect place to do it.

Curriculum Developers:

  • Bitblondy - Bitblondy has been an active DAO contributor since writing her thesis on governance and engaging with various web3 communities. With a background in social and political sciences, she is passionate about decentralized organizations and protocol politics. She is dedicated to web3 education (also as creator of web3-resources.xyz) and bringing people with different backgrounds together.
  • Abidemi - Abidemi is an investment analyst and ecosystem builder dedicated to web3 adoption and venture funding in Africa. She has contributed to various DAOs such as Gitcoin, BanklessDAO/Bankless Africa and Africa3, focusing on marketing, governance, operations, community, and investment strategy. A speaker and mentor, she has guided founders on fundraising and product-market fit. She’s currently supporting investments at Emurgo Kepple Ventures where she specializes in deal sourcing, market research, and due diligence. Her mission is to back founders using crypto, blockchain, and web3 to solve Africa’s coordination challenges.
  • Kenechukwu Eze - Kenechukwu Eze is a Protocol Governance Specialist at StableLab. In his role, he focuses on designing and implementing governance systems for prominent decentralised organisations such as Aave DAO, 1inch DAO, Gnosis and Paladin. Before StableLab, Kene contributed to Wildfire DAO as an Operator where he focused on leveraging partnerships to drive growth for DAOs.
  • Kevin Nielsen - Kevin was previously the founder of Boardroom (a company that Agora recently acquired), a platform supporting DAOs and protocols with governance infrastructure and tooling. He has led governance advisory and operation roles and large protocol DAOs and specialized in delegate management and governance workflows in previous roles.
  • Nneoma Kanu - Nneoma is a Technical Governance Specialist at StableLab, where she designs and implements governance frameworks, strategic initiatives and technical solutions for top protocol DAOs, including Lido, Safe, Uniswap, and Arbitrum, ensuring they resonate with their distinctive visions and objectives. She also oversees multiple ecosystem funding initiatives and serves as a strategic advisor to various project teams in the Web3 ecosystem.
  • Ivey (SEEDGov) - Ivey is a governance analyst in SEEDGov, dedicated to design, analysis and implementation of governance programs. Particularly dedicated to Scroll, zkSync, Lido as well as a contributor within Everclear and Paraswap. Before that he was part of Decentraland DAO Facilitation Squad.
  • Tino (SEEDGov) - With previous experience as a web3 researcher and technical writer, Tino has been working for the last two and a half years as a research associate conducting technical assessments of decentralised protocols to determine their level of decentralisation under different regulatory frameworks. Since last January, he has been collaborating with SEEDGov as a governance researcher/analyst on Scroll, ZKsync, Lido, and Gitcoin, designing, analysing, and implementing governance programmes.
  • Nick Almond (Factory Labs) - Nick is CEO of Factory Labs and has a background in Physics, Governance Design and Learning Theory. He has held Director level Learning and Teaching roles at UK Universities and he completed his academic career as Associate Dean of Learning, Teaching and Enhancement at the London College of Fashion. He has validated and supported in the design of over 200 Higher Education courses, has taught Masters Courses on Curriculum Theory and Development and has trained over a thousand teachers and academics.
  • Connor McCormick - Connor McCormick has an educational background in business, economics, and computer science. He’s the prior founder of a machine learning computer vision hardware startup where he worked tightly with local, state, and national governments to inform their operations. He has worked professionally in three collective intelligence startups, ranging from climate intelligence (Digital Gaia), to forecasting (Metaculus) and now he is the founder of the Network Goods Institute where he designs tools for collective intelligence and public goods funding. Connor is passionate about creating novel governance and sensemaking frameworks that enable a new era of work and he views Scroll as the perfect place to do it.

Financial

Trainee Incentives – $15,000

We anticipate that up to 20 participants will complete the program. Rewards will be distributed based on performance and engagement, with detailed assessment methodologies outlined in a follow-up proposal. This budget also includes incentive multipliers to recognize exceptional performance among trainees.

  • Trainee Rewards Pool: $10,000
  • Additional Rewards for Outstanding Participants: $5,000
  • Total Trainee Incentives: $15,000

Curriculum Development & Facilitation – $57,000

Executing this program requires a coordinated effort in curriculum development and facilitation over a 7-week period.

Module Development – $27,000

Six core modules will be developed by nine contributors, with one additional module created by the Scroll Foundation. Each contributor-developed module is budgeted at $4,500–$5,000, based on the following:

  • Estimated time per module: ~15 hours
    • Breakdown: (0.5–1 hour per session × 7 sessions) + ~5 hours prep/review
  • Contributor rate assumptions:
    • $150/hr for two collaborators: 15 hrs × $150 × 2 = $4,500
    • $200/hr for one contributor: 15 hrs × $200 = $3,000

Costs may vary depending on module complexity, but the total for six modules will not exceed $27,000.

Facilitation – $29,000

Facilitators are responsible for the end-to-end delivery of the training program over an 8-10 week sprint period. Their duties include:

  • Designing and managing the application process (~20 hours)
  • Hosting live sessions (~15 hours)
  • Conducting assessments and reviewing deliverables (~20 hours)
  • Creating and maintaining the Notion Hub (~10 hours)
  • Post-program evaluation and reporting (~10–15 hours)

Tooling & Administrative Costs – $1,000

Covers essential tools and administrative needs such as workspace software, access management, and collaboration platforms.

Delegation Pool – 100,000 SCR

A pool of 100,000 SCR will be delegated via a multi-sig managed by the Foundation. This non-monetary budget (i.e., delegated voting power, not liquid tokens) will support 5,000 SCR delegations to each high-performing graduate who successfully completes the program.

Line Item Breakdown Cost
Trainee Incentives $15,000
Module Development $27,000
Facilitator Compensation $29,000
Tooling and Admin Costs $1,000
Budget Buffer* $15,000
Budget for delegation pool 100,000 SCR
Total $87,000 + 100,000 SCR

Total proposal request = $87,000 equivalent in SCR + 100,000 SCR for delegation.

All funds requested will be paid in SCR.

Note: The budget buffer ensures adequate coverage in the event of adverse price action or unanticipated execution costs. Unused funds will be returned to the DAO treasury or rolled over into a future program iteration.

Program Evaluation and Accountability.

This program will run for 7 weeks, and the execution team will work to ensure that the curriculum reflects the best possible standards. At the end of the program, the execution team will submit a report that details all the learnings, metrics, and possible areas of improvement to the program; this will be submitted on the DAO forum. Success will be evaluated through post-program metrics such as delegate retention rates, proposal pass/fail ratios, and community sentiment analysis. This report, along with the conduct of our newly minted delegates, will go on to determine if this program needs to be continued or discontinued.

Factory Labs will join the Delegate Accelerator programme in a curriculum evaluation and support role. At key way points in the programme, Nick Almond and Matt Haynes will deploy VOICE, a tool for aggregating sentiment and preferences of participants and facilitators. Using a combination of voting and AI, VOICE will collect a data set that can be used to support facilitators in directing focus and support towards topics that participants are finding most interesting and challenging.

In the post delivery phase Factory Labs will contact delegates and support them in using VOICE to evaluate their experience, diagnose any remaining gaps in their learning and identify areas where the programme can be improved in future iterations. A key output will be both to evaluate the effectiveness of this programme, but also to establish technology enhanced evaluation practices that can be used in other Scroll DAO initiatives.

Closing Note

By investing in this program, the Scroll DAO will cultivate a robust pipeline of informed, engaged delegates equipped to navigate the complexities of decentralized governance. We anticipate measurable outcomes, including:

  • Increased Active Votable Supply: Delegates trained through this program will attract greater SCR delegation, thus enhancing participation and diversifying governance influence.
  • Higher-Quality Proposals: Scroll delegates will gain the skills to draft, analyze, and refine proposals that align with the DAO’s long-term vision.
  • Stronger Community Resilience: A decentralized, knowledgeable delegate base mitigates risks of centralization, cartel formation, and governance apathy, and ensures decisions reflect broad stakeholder consensus.

This pilot program lays the groundwork for sustainable, participatory governance at Scroll DAO. A follow-up proposal will expand on operational specifics, including detailed curriculum specifics, program tooling, trainee compensation structures, and KPIs for impact. By approving this initiative, the Scroll DAO reaffirms its commitment to decentralization, inclusivity, and proactive community stewardship.

Special thanks to the Scroll Foundation team members and community contributors who participated in various discussion and feedback sessions to develop the proposal: Eugene, Jamilya, Ivey (SEEDGov), Tino (SEEDGov), Kevin Nielsen, Nick Almond, Abidemi, Bitblondy, Connor McCormick, Alex, Humberto Besso-Oberto, Luis Cedeño, Marlene M., and others.

13 Likes

Hi all, I put together a brief negation game rationale covering the DAO Delegate Accelerator Proposal

High level takeaways:

  1. It seems to me that there are much more efficient ways to increase delegation at a cheaper cost
  2. This doesn’t seem to move the needle on KPIs for the DAO (e.g. projects, transactions)
  3. The cost per trained delegate is high, driven by the module development and facilitation cost
  4. There may be better ways to spend that much money

Ways in which I think we could make this make sense:

  1. The module development cost could be smaller, I think a generous offer would be something like $80 / hour @ an estimated 20 hours of work would be $1600 per module. If there are two people working on a module maybe it can be a bit more (~2400?)
  2. Likewise, the facilitation cost seems quite high. ~$4.6k per facilitated session.

That said, I do think that increasing delegation, and increasing engagement of delegates is a worthy goal. I can see a version of this program being incredibly valuable for onboarding new DAO contributors, teaching the important parts of being a delegate, and maybe even exposing new people to crypto.

Important note: I am a prospective curriculum developer and facilitator. So, this definitely cuts against my incentives.

Here’s a recording of me working through the considerations of this proposal:

3 Likes

As the delegate that initially suggested this delegation program I believe the program is incredibly useful, I am a little worried that the development costs/facilitator compensation are over 60% of the costs of the proposal. Resonating with @connormcmk thoughts above and appreciate his honesty!

I believe that if the costs are ~100k$ if is not capital efficient to allocate only 100k $Scroll towards the delegates. This ratio should be at least 1:1

Also, as an independent delegate that’s only interested in efficient spending I am curious what guardrails are into place to ensure that this 100k $Scroll delegation pool wlll not be delegated based on the social graph of the facilitators themselves.

PS. The fact that Factory DAO, Stanble Labs and SEEDGov are joining forces is a great signal that would make me say yes to the proposal even considering the details shared above.

2 Likes

This opinion reflects that of Ethereum Argentina:

Thank you very much for the proposal and for the extensive discussion that led to this final version. Ethereum Argentina is strongly against this proposal.

As I mentioned during one of the calls where the introduction of this program was discussed, we believe that this initiative is not aligned with the current stage of Scroll or its DAO. In our view, this is not the time to allocate resources to training delegates or potential delegates, but rather to focus on growing the Scroll ecosystem, driving network adoption, and increasing builder engagement in governance.

In this regard, we agree with what Axl from SEED stated in the Telegram group, where he emphasized that the DAO should work on positioning Scroll within the broader L2 ecosystem.

Regarding the objectives of the proposal, on one hand:

From the list of delegates on the official page, I see many well-known names with significant governance experience, such as L2BEAT, Web3Citizens, Curia, Olimpio, SEED, Blockful, Itu Blockchain, ACI, Areta, and even Stable Lab yourselves. Therefore, there is no urgent need to bring in more delegates who understand how governance processes work.

Also, we want to express our concern regarding the idea of using the treasury or the Foundation funds to delegate to new delegates. We believe this approach presents significant risks on two fronts:

  1. Centralization of influence: If delegates are funded directly by the Foundation, they will inevitably be aligned with its interests, which contradicts the ecosystem’s stated goal of decentralization.

  2. Agency problem: If the Foundation chooses not to interfere in these delegates’ decision-making, we would end up with representatives who are accountable to no one. Without delegators backing them or any direct consequences for their actions, these delegates would lack skin in the game, which can lead to misaligned decision-making and, potentially, irresponsible spending of funds.

We believe it is crucial that any delegation mechanism ensures accountability and maintains alignment with the interests of Scroll holders and the Scroll ecosystem.

Regarding the Curriculum, right now we do not see the value in training more “governance professionals” who are taught the DAO’s processes. The DAO governs (or will eventually govern) the tech. We don’t believe Scroll is in a stage were it needs professionals in governance processes, but rather professionals in the technology and ecosystem that Scroll is building—people who understand the current challenges and how to solve them. Processes are learned or explained when necessary.

There is only one week in the curriculum dedicated to the Scroll ecosystem (Week 5). If the program moves forward, we believe that a significantly larger part of the program should be focused on this aspect. Things like what Scroll is, how it works, what its competitive advantage is compared to other L2s, what its current ecosystem looks like, or what it lacks in order to think about how to improve it.

We also believe that these “KPIs” are somewhat loose. They should be more concrete and measurable.

We also have some concerns about how this voting power will be allocated. The proposal requests 5K per student and estimates 20 students, which raises questions about the selection process. It seems that voting power would be granted simply by being accepted into the program, rather than through a competitive evaluation of the most suitable candidates.

Additionally, beyond the voting power, is there a plan to ensure long-term engagement and talent retention?

Finally, we agree with the points raised by @connormcmk and @ZER8 regarding the program’s costs, which seem high.

We appreciate Stable Lab for the proposal, but we believe that now is not the right time. We do not see this as the right moment to spend the resources on training delegates.

2 Likes

The below commentary reflects my personal opinions and is in no way reflective of Event Horizon as a community nor how Event Horizon may vote in future proposals. Event Horizon governance is entirely determined by the collective decision making of the community, not the thoughts of any one individual

I’ll start by saying, I appreciate the stable labs team and their work here. I broadly support expanding the delegate body and voter participation.

Increase post-program delegation: I strongly believe follow-through is key. Should we want newly onboarded delegates to stay, they should feel as though they have graduated into becoming a durable, meaningful stakeholder in the ecosystem. With only 5,000 in delegated VP, I’m not sure this will be accomplished. Doubling the post program delegation to 10,000 SCR would be more suitable.

Eliminate The Program Incentives: The program offering itself is comprehensive and clearly designed with a great deal of care. The reward is being part of the cohort. If we are to attract individuals truly passionate about governance, compensation shouldn’t be necessary. Respectfully, I disagree with Pedro in that, I do not believe more incentive is at all necessary, so long as the post-program delegation is sufficient. Greater non-VP-based incentives only muddies alignment and participant intentions. This would, even if modestly, also preserve treasury value.

Event Horizon Support: I support this initiative agnostic of whether Event Horizon is supporting it or not. However, if the program team finds any value in utilizing the Event Horizon product and tooling, I would work to explore possibilities.

  1. The Event Horizon Interface provides DAO-specific agents to help retail voters better understand governance. See link above for more details.

  2. The Event Horizon infrastructure allows for vote pooling which can be distributed in creative ways. One example, Event Horizon could provide hats through hats protocol (graduation caps?) which offer successful post-program graduates multiplied VP when using the community SCR pool (currently the 5th largest delegation in the Scroll ecosystem). These hats would be revocable and transferable by the DAO and could be redistributed in the future as the program creators of DAO see fit.

Beyond this, I am open to calls and brainstorming if there seems to be a thread worth pulling here.

Budget: I have a lot of respect for @connormcmk 's candor here in speaking against his own potential compensation. I am not knowledgeable enough with regards to educational programs to be the right person to specifically suggestion budgets. However, I tend to agree with Connor’s logic and the general notion that the budget (unless further complexity and details are left out of the proposal as it stands) seem like they could be a bit more efficient – not a huge sticking point though.

Technical Emphasis: I agree with Pedro in that there should be greater emphasis on the Scroll Ecosystem and technical components. This is a great point.

KPIs: I also agree with @pedro in that the KPI structure is a bit loose. One remedy would be to remove KPIs but rather allow each cohort member to write a post-program personal report and appeal by which they share with the DAO what they’ve learned, what they’ve done, and what they will do. From this, the DAO can vote to ‘approve’ or ‘pass’ on that individual’s post-program delegation reward.

2 Likes

Thanks @Kene_StableLab for creating the draft! I’m happy to see the program will be open for current and prospective delegates, I think it’s good to have both sides represented there. There are still some details, that will need to be clarified, I guess with the second operational proposal then?

Regarding the budget, the curriculum development cost should be mostly a one-time cost, and then the program can be repeated at a high quality, so that seems reasonable to me. I agree with @ZER8 though, that the facilitator cost per session seems rather substantial.

Thanks @pedro for bringing up your concerns. I agree with being mindful about centralization risks with foundation delegations and tailoring the program to Scroll specifically, while I don’t think that the delegate training does oppose the current focus on growing the ecosystem.

Besides, it’s great to see the general framework is done, and we can commit to creating the program. Thanks @eugene for doing the survey, that was very helpful to get an impression from the other delegates.

2 Likes

Thanks for the proposal.

First of all, we believe this proposal is great for new delegates since it can help them sharpen their skills in analysis, writing, and evaluating proposals, leading to better discussions and decisions in Scroll DAO. It also can ensure they understand Scroll’s governance structure, so they can contribute with clear direction.

Well we always support decentralization where power should belong to those who are committed and actively contributing. Keeping it limited to existing delegates only makes the DAO more centralized.

We’ll be applying for the program and hope to bring real value to Scroll DAO!

1 Like

Thank you for the candid and detailed feedback @connormcmk

The costs of running this program may seem high due to what it would take to set up a high-quality program. Still, suppose you also factor in the quality of instructors and curriculum developers working on this program. In that case, it becomes clear that building a scroll-focused delegate program may come at a premium.
These initial setup costs should not be viewed as the running costs of a delegate training program. With development out of the way, it will cost much less to run this program going forward if it is approved and possibly renewed.

We are definitely flexible to adjusting the costs based on the DAOs feedback.

1 Like

Regarding costs

The SCR reserved for delegation would be distributed to the trainee delegates based on their performance in the training program, and the metrics for evaluating trainees will be fully outlined if this proposal passes.

1 Like

Being a delegate should not be something reserved for professional delegate teams who have lots of experience across multiple DAOs, the idea behind this is teach Scroll Builders and other stakeholders who have skin in the game about how to engage with the DAO, this will ensure the DAO makes well rounded decisions that cater to all stakeholders.

One of the modules focuses on strategic governance, which helps delegates be more proactive about seeking and proposing growth initiatives, identifying partnership and integration opportunities, etc., which support the protocol’s positioning in the broader landscape.

While this a valid concern that can come up, this is not a fact. The Scroll DAO currently has a votable supply of 6,329,000 SCR. While this may not seem too concerning at the moment, governance is a vital part of the Scroll DAO, and it is important that we try to increase the amount of SCR represented in Governance.

These delegations from the DAO are fully transparent and not attach conditions relating to how a delegate may vote, delegation programs are well founded in our ecosystem, a good example is at Uniswap where the Delegation Program improved the Governance Activity.

The SCR would be delegated to high performing students, and not just anyone who is accepted into the program as stated here.

Thank you for the feedbakc, while we understand the rationale behind this, we think this may be too much delegation too soon, we would propose starting small with and wokring our way up based on how the delegate performs.

In order to increase the chances of retention and consistent engagement, we need to have incentives for trainees, this is a key feature of running a program in our ecosystem, comparable programs at Optimism leverage incentives to keep trainees engaged.

Regarding costs, these are my thoughts.

This is a very great suggestion and I will take note of this for possible consideration with the other authors.

Yes the addiitonal details will be clarified with the second operational proposal if this passes.

Regarding costs, these are my thoughts, however we are very flexible based on the DAOs feedback.

1 Like

Thank you for the feedback!

1 Like

I believe this is the exact issue though, and why so many programs (correct me if I’m mistaken) fail to drive durable delegates for their respective ecosystems. If a user must be paid to join in the first place or to be retained during the program, then how does one expect them to stay unpaid after the program?

I suppose one argument could be that the program is more intense than being a standard delegate, so maybe there’s a drop off in time commitment? But, ultimately, I think one of the greatest challenges program creators face in these kinds of initiatives is actually the pre-program, top-of-funnel portion. The finding of highly motivated aspiring delegates. This would require outreach and marketing. I’d be more supportive of distributing the incentive budget items toward pre-program methods of finding motivated users. This is also something EH would be happy to support in as this top-of-funnel is also very important to us.

And, as an alternative perspective, if payment is the retention vehicle then perhaps waiting until after a DIP-type program is launched would drive best outcomes. Then graduates can immediately onboard into a delegate incentive plan.

3 Likes

Just to clarify: I don’t think it’s bad for the foundation to participate in the DAO; on the contrary, I think it’s fantastic. I just believe that the participation of delegates with foundation-delegated VP isn’t very useful for pursuing decentralization as a goal (this was mentioned as part of the proposal).

Given that, I believe, as I mentioned, there is a potential agency problem.

1 Like

Hello, ScrollDAO community!

Following the extensive and thoughtful feedback on the Delegate Accelerator Proposal, we plan to use the upcoming community call this Wednesday to dive deeper into key points and co-align on the path forward.

:spiral_calendar: Date: Wednesday April 2nd
:four_o_clock: Time: 1p EST/UTC-4
:round_pushpin: Where: https://meet.google.com/pcm-nxzr-rig

What we’ll cover:

  • Rebalancing the budget (module costs, facilitator compensation)
  • Clarifying delegation logic post-program (merit-based, amounts)
  • Refining the KPI framework and program success metrics (Note: The follow-up proposal was intended to contain more expansive details on the program success metrics)
  • Addressing concerns about centralization and alignment
  • Strengthening the Scroll-specific content in the curriculum
  • Discussion on incentives vs. intrinsic motivation
  • Next steps: Proposal 1 refinement, Proposal 2 (operational proposal) and implementation path

Looking forward to seeing many of you there!

3 Likes

Gm @Nneoma_StableLab , I wasn’t able to attend today’s community call to hear discussions for this proposal. Was this meeting recorded, and if so, could you post a link to the recording? Tk u!

Update: I found the 2025 list of meeting calls (awesome to have these all listed in one place, thk you to the person who does that, very helpful!). I’m presuming that if today’s meeting was recorded, that I will find it here.
Thks!

2 Likes

Glad you find it useful! Quick update - yesterday call recordings and transcripts were uploaded, feel free to check.

2 Likes

Here is our rationale on the proposal as ITU Blockchain. We will add more when new ideas come up.

I appreciate the initiative behind the Delegate Accelerator proposal and its aim to strengthen our governance framework by developing skilled, high-context delegates.

I concur with the asks for increased transparency. Specifically, providing a detailed breakdown of the budget allocation across program components would offer valuable insight into fund utilization. Additionally, clearly defining the selection criteria for program participants would ensure an equitable and inclusive process.

Thank you for bringing this forward!