Proposal: Proposal: Governance Contribution Recognition (Cycle 2: May - December 2025)
Vote: Abstain
Rationale: Proxy co-authored this proposal; we will vote abstain to avoid any conflicts of interest.
Proposal: Scroll DAO Timelock Test
Vote: For
Rationale: Testing out aspects of governance with trial runs is an important part of a healthy governance system. We should regularly check that everything is working as intended. This is a relatively low-stakes test with sending 1 SCR to the timelock.
Proposal: Proposal: Governance Council (GC) Formation
Vote: For
Rationale: We’re happy to support the establishment of the Governance Council. Having a dedicated body that drives governance-related experimentation, innovation, and research can help to keep Scroll at the forefront of the DAO governance space. We support the notion that this proposal advances two separate goals: growing the Scroll network and supporting progressive decentralization. The 10hr/week time committment from 3 members for 6 months is a well-balanced workload (in terms of both the requested budget and the GC’s expected output). The changes made during the discussion process (e.g. 2 Foundation seats & 1 delegate to 1 Foundation seat and 2 delegate/external) showed positive flexibility and we’re happy to support the proposal as-is.
Proposal: DAO Treasury Management
Vote: Avantgarde
Rationale: We found Avantgarde’s proposal to have a superior pricing structure and a better phased rollout plan (e.g. starting with goal/KPI alignment before moving to active management). We’ve also worked closely with the team in the past, and although it was not in a treasury management capacity, we can vouch for their responsiveness and professionalism. This position will be heavily iterative and the DAO could benefit from a well-known team that will consistently show up to community calls and proactively make changes. The other applicants were qualified as well, but choosing Avantgarde is a fairly straightforward decision for us.