SEEDGov Delegate Thread

Delegates
1

Delegate Thread

Name: @SEEDGov

Delegate Profile: https://gov.scroll.io/delegates/0x73506528332BEcf6121F71AC9aaD43646a41994C

RRSS:

Introduction

Scroll is one of the most prominent ZK-rollup protocols, representing a significant technological advancement for Ethereum scalability. SEEDGov shares Scroll’s vision and our approach to governance is always long-term, aimed at supporting the protocol’s success, with the DAO serving as a key enabler alongside stakeholders.

After immersing ourselves in Scroll since its inception with Spanish documentation translations, which enabled us to focus on our passion, we extensively researched all available Rollups at the time. This effort led to the creation of a documentation library, and through our exploration, ZK rollups emerged as our true passion. The past couple of years have been filled with space exploration, workshops, guides, content creation, events, and contributions to the ecosystem. We believe it’s crucial to promote Scroll’s complex ecosystem to foster collective growth and fully demonstrate its potential.

SEED Org - Layer 2 Explorations

What is SEEDGov?

SEEDGov is a dynamic and evolving vertical within the SEED Org Ecosystem, focused on shaping the future of decentralized governance in Web3 through active participation, community engagement, and experimentation. Our approach emphasizes minimizing governance where appropriate and professionalizing it where necessary.

As an active delegate platform, SEEDGov engages in governance across multiple projects. With roots in community values, we’ve evolved from education-based initiatives to a participatory approach that drives collaboration, coordination, and decision-making in the ever-changing Web3 landscape.

Our work embraces various protocols, from AMMs to Layer 2, where we design and implement governance infrastructures, manage grants and allocation programs, oversee incentives, and onboard the right builders to meet each protocol’s needs. Seed’s diverse and multidisciplinary team brings the right flexibility and adaptability to strengthen the resilience of Scroll DAO.

Learn more about our work in other protocols: Here

Scroll<> SEEDGov

We strongly believe that Scroll’s mission and vision are in harmony with SEEDGov’s values. Additionally, our organization has been engaged with Scroll from its early stages, actively collaborating with its core team and community. Building on our previous experience, we are committed to making a significant impact within the DAO through the following focus areas:

  • Governance Innovation: New protocols with novel technology are the perfect sandbox for experimenting with new ways of decentralization and innovation in governance infrastructure and off-chain decision-making mechanisms to avoid polarization and zero-sum engagements. Designs must be thought of in terms of a mission, vision, and its scope, and are intrinsically bound to the concepts of effectiveness and efficiency, but finding a good balance involves some important trade-offs in terms of centralization vs. decentralization.
  • Decentralization: As the ecosystem continues to mature and be driven by its community, we will collaborate in the creation, iteration, and improvement of governance processes to ensure the gradual decentralization of the infrastructure aiming that the system remains secure.
  • Community Led Growth & Sustainability: We will promote and support all initiatives that enable the growth, adoption, scalability and innovation for the Scroll ecosystem. Our focus will be placed on ensuring that all growth initiatives are reliable, secure, and sustainable over time.
  • Security: We will always make sure that no DAO decisions will jeopardize the security of the protocol and thus harm users.
  • Ethos and Support: We will actively contribute to the governance of the protocol and its ecosystem worldwide, looking forward to working with other interested delegates to promote the Scroll mission and encourage others to actively participate in DAO governance.

Our initiatives with Scroll

Scroll Articles (Spanish)

One of SEED Org’s verticals was to focus on researching scaling solutions, with an exclusive focus on technical aspects. We have shared several guides, research, and translations covering Layer 2 solutions, from optimistic rollups to zk rollups and validiums.

In the early days of Scroll, we took on the task of explaining the behind-the-scenes technology in order to bring this knowledge to the Spanish-speaking world.

Online Spanish Scroll Workshops

Scroll Official documentation Translation

After carrying out multiple initiatives (the ones mentioned above), we decided to go one step further by translating all the Scroll documentation so far into Spanish. After a few weeks of review by the Scroll team, it was added to the official website.

Conflict of Interest

SEEDGov operates globally with multiple team members actively involved in governance systems such as Arbitrum, Optimism, Uniswap, and Gnosis, among others. It is worth clarifying that our team members are specifically aligned with the protocol in which they contribute.

Should any conflict of interest arise, it will be transparently communicated in this thread.

9 Likes
2

Hi SEED, glad to see you here

Big alignment on this. If we’re successful in doing this for DAOs that will be our big positive externality on the world.

Enjoyed The mindset behind Scroll
y se me presentó la oportunidad de practicar mi español :slight_smile:

6 Likes
3

Hi! We’ll be using this thread to share our voting rationales.

Research to inform a builder support strategy

Vote: For

Rationale:

Based on our experience with similar experiments, we’ll be supporting this proposal as it will hopefully provide valuable insights in order to start building specific initiatives towards Scroll’s expansion and help to outline the framework to foster a committed community of builders. The approach towards the research sounds methodical and consistent as well as the proposed timelines. Budget-wise, it’ll be naturally tied to the quality of the deliverables, but as for now it sounds reasonable given the teams track record. Also we’d like to point out that all community and delegate queries were properly addressed, providing a rather strong consensus on the approval.

2 Likes
4

DAO Scroll Constitution

Vote: For

Rationale: As verified delegates, we support the first version of Scroll DAO Constitution. We think that it is the correct first step to give a well-defined framework to the DAO, its voting cycles, and activities. Besides bringing clarity to those who want to take a first glance at how and why this DAO is here, it serves to those who are already here as a reminder of those initial motivations. As we mentioned before, all the feedback was well incorporated and given that it’s a living document that will evolve over time, we will be happy to contribute to keep pushing it further.

5

Euclid Upgrade

Vote: For

Rationale: We voted in favour of the Euclid upgrade, and we’re looking forward to seeing it implemented. As we noted in our forum comments, the upgrade was very well presented both in the forum and on the governance calls. This shouldn’t be overlooked since upgrades in complex systems, such as L2s, can be hard to comprehend for non-developers. On top of that, we believe that the changes this upgrade will introduce tick a lot of the boxes of what Scroll is needing at the moment: benefits for everyday users, increased general status as an L2, and improved compatibility and auditability.

To sum up, transaction costs reduced by 80% and 4x Scroll’s throughput will help everyday users. The Stage-1 badge, besides increasing the value of Scroll as an L2, will also give users extra assurance of network liveness in case of sequencer failure. Last but not least, increasing the compatibility and auditability of Scroll are benefits that speaks for themselves.

All in all, we’re really happy to see this proposal here, and we support it!

6

Scroll DAO Delegate Accelerator

Vote: For

Rationale: For some context, this first proposal regarding the DAO Accelerator program is one of the outcomes of Scroll’s first Co-Creation Cycle and part of Q1 2025 Governance Goals. As contributors of the working group we are proud of the efforts made so far to have a proposal presented within this voting cycle and grateful for the feedback, collaboration and thought-process behind it.

On a first stance, it’s encouraging to see the place that governance holds within Scroll, which is a fact that certainly shouldn’t go unnoticed and, to our eyes, sets the ground for a safe, participative and plural ecosystem that fosters growth on top of the tech. The spirit of this proposal is to enable that by onboarding a cohort of people commited to that end and to facilitate the tools and knowledge to bring value to Scroll, or to provide governance rails to the value that some people may be already adding on different fronts.

Many valid points have been brought up by delegates in terms of the foreseen challenges that an initiative of this sort may bring, some of which have certainly been considered within the ideation of this proposal and some others intentionally left for a second proposal that will fine-tune on several aspects such as final curriculum design, impact measurement, admission criteria and other gaps that this first proposal might have missed.

Now that the overall idea is up to vote, this proposal should be seen as a milestone within that discussion as well as securing a budget that will allow more thorough analysis on the options instead of building in the dark in regards of the financial capabilities. Hopefully further feedback is provided on how to improve the current program or how to insert it into ongoing discussions, which can lead to several and interesting pathways.

Feel free to reach out to discuss any of the proposal points!

7

Proposal: Brazil Local Node

Vote: For

Rationale: Following our endorsement in the forum, we voted ‘for’ this proposal. Brazil’s importance in this context is not breaking news. By being Latam’s biggest economy plus having an ever-increasing crypto ecosystem, it was a natural choice for the Local Nodes framework. When it comes to the proposal itself, we believe that Modular Crypto has structured it quite well and it’s aligned with the Local Nodes’ goals. To this end, the ‘Programa de Aceleração Scroll Brasil’ is specifically designed to ‘transform builders into founders’, preparing them for future Open Zero editions. Moreover, their strategic partnerships will help them to reach out to builders and, coupled with the IRL events, targeted bizdev efforts, and their educational content, they are on track to supply Scroll with fresh Brazilian builders. All in all, a solid proposal with great potential.

Kenya Scroll Local Node Founder Program

Vote: For

Rationale: We cast a ‘for’ vote on Kenya’s Local Node proposal. Africa’s potential is not a vacuum and overly repeated mantra but rather a reality supported by numbers and active involvement in the crypto ecosystem. Therefore, we agreed with the Foundation on marking Kenya as a key region from the very beginning and we voted ‘for’ this proposal. The proposal crafted by Web3Clubs is well-aligned with the Local Nodes’ ethos. We liked the statement of having 5 to 10 Scroll-powered projects rolled out through their Founder Factory model. Another great point is the three-stage pipeline, which provides a structured progression to turn ideas into market-ready projects. Lastly, the strategic partnerships mentioned plus the Web3 incubator are set up to bring new builders to Scroll. Looking forward to seeing this Local Node take off.

Proposal Title: Votable Supply Adjustment - Auto-Abstaining Wallet

Vote: For

Rationale: As we mentioned during the governance calls and in the forum discussions, we supported this proposal, therefore we voted ‘for’ it. We believe that, among the discussed options, this was certainly the most straightforward one to temporarily tackle the quorum concern. Now that we, hopefully, have sorted out this issue, we are really looking forward to discussing long-term solutions to the real issue: increasing Scroll’s votable supply.

Proposal: Gov Contribution Recognition - Retro & Working Group

Vote: For

Rationale: We materialised our support for this proposal by casting our ‘for’ vote on it. We really appreciate the work that Eugene and Jamilya put into crafting this proposal and iterating on it to include delegates’ feedback. The discussion around this proposal was pretty helpful in understanding what other delegates think about the work that we bring to the DAO and how valuable it is for everyone. Looking forward to seeing this proposal approved and the working group created.

Proposal: Ecosystem Growth Council Formation

Vote: For

Rationale: We voted ‘for’ on this proposal. From the beginning we supported the idea of creating the EGC, since addressing the proposals on ecosystem growth matters requires not only dedication but also knowledge on the topic. Additionally, we believe that the composition of the Council is well-balanced and the compensation sounds good too. We expect some operational follow regarding accountability and leadership measures once the EGC is set up.

Mexico Mobile Scroll Node: A Founder-Focused Onboarding and Support Program

Vote: For

Rationale: We voted ‘for’ this proposal. While not listed as one of the four key regions for the Scroll Foundation, no one can deny Mexico’s importance to the crypto ecosystem and that it will well-represent the Hispanic market. Humberto crafted a pretty solid proposal which lives up to the biggest Local Nodes’ goal of onboarding builders to Scroll. In this regard, it’s interesting how the programme is set to onboard builders and get them ready to participate in the Open Zero and Open Campus programmes. There’s definitely great potential in Mexico’s Local Node.

1 Like
8

Appreciate you taking the time to vote and explain your rationale, @SEEDGov ! Big thanks for dropping the Agora links with each one :raising_hands:

1 Like
9

Feynman Upgrade on Scroll Mainnet

Vote: For

Rationale: The Feynman upgrade is the logical next step following the Euclid upgrade. As we said before, EIP-1559 has worked well on Ethereum and other chains, therefore, implementing it on Scroll, along with rollup fee updates that factor in compression, will definitely improve the fee experience.

Getting the blockhash opcode to return actual block hashes instead of pseudo-random ones fixes a compatibility issue that we have been looking forward to addressing. Similarly, making ecPairing fully compatible with Ethereum and adding EIP-2935 and EIP-7623 from Pectra keeps Scroll aligned with Ethereum, which matters not only for developers but also to keep pushing the narrative of Scroll being the ZK-rollup with the highest Ethereum compatibility.

The smart contract changes clean up some technical debt from the old halo2 ZK-proof system, such as removing transaction skipping and old codec versions to improve the chain’s overall security.

All in all, this upgrade tackles the right priorities while it moves Scroll forward. Looking forward to seeing it implemented.

Security Subsidy Program for Scroll Builders

Vote: For

Rationale: We’ve supported and endorsed this proposal since we believe that this programme addresses a real need in Scroll’s ecosystem, such as getting projects launched securely without the massive audit costs that often block teams from deploying.

The team behind this proposal gathered and incorporated most of the feedback, having this version looking pretty solid. The two-component approach gives the proper flexibility to cover an extended myriad of cases. @Areta marketplace has great potential, and combined with the broader security coverage through Immunefi, which has already helped Scroll find some bugs in the past, they make up a great combo.

That being said, having the Foundation and Labs overseeing this programme initially, to then switch to the EGC once it’s established, makes more sense than creating another ad hoc committee. Also, the investment contract structure should help prevent subsidy farming while keeping projects committed to Scroll. We are particularly keen on seeing how this evolves onto its final version, also reflecting some of @Matt_FactoryLabs points in his rationale.

One final mention that we’d like to see is that Scroll also takes part in the follow requirement: “Projects are also required to engage in co-marketing activities to be coordinated by Immunefi”

As we all know at this point, security is foundational for any ecosystem looking to attract builders and users. Nice initiative that we look forward to seeing implemented and aligned to the Open Campus roadmap.

Community Council Formation

Vote: For

Rationale: Local Nodes are core pillar of Scroll DAO since its beginnings. The Community Council is governance’s response to that vision and it is meant to act as the Local Node’s main counterparty in terms of reach, guidance, monitoring and overall operations.

The depicted scope, conformation and decision-making process are reasonable to us and despite having some concerns regarding the Grants Pilot we’ve decided to support the initiative in its experimental approach and given the ongoing events pipeline and initiatives expected for the upcoming 6 months. In that sense, we expect consistent reporting and ongoing iterations over the Grants Pilot, the Local Nodes framework and also the tooling that’s incorporated in the program. .

To that end, we do think the budget is optimistic but, if properly managed, can definitely bring a lot of value to Scroll’s positioning within the ecosystem. On a side note regarding the potential overlap with the EGC, we do want to remark the different nature of the initiatives and that the governance structure is still shaping up, allowing for further conversations and discussions on this end.

Better DAO Decisions & Aligned Incentives: Research on Carroll Mechanisms

Vote: Against

Rationale: First of all, we truly appreciate every effort to improve the DAO and how decisions are made within it. In that sense, the approach of Carroll Mechanisms as an evolution from futarchy sounds very promising. Nonetheless, it’s also worth mentioning that while being the first to implement an innovative solution can have an outstanding impact, we should not lose sight of the fact that all these new solutions are just starting their trial or discovery phase; therefore, their viability is yet to be proven.

Being that said, we are not ready to support the proposal due to several reasons:

  • Timing - As it has been mentioned, the proposal felt rushed into this voting cycle. Despite the DAO not having a formal forum post duration standard, this was mentioned by several delegates and we certainly believe the same. The proposal itself touches several rather relevant points that merit as much discussion as needed and by no means the voting calendar should be a blocker for such.

  • Complexity - The grants as investments framework is interesting and makes absolute sense, but it touches on several legal, financial and governance assumptions that we should review thoroughly as well as having some success cases from other ecosystems. In that sense, the Negation Game has been sort of inherited from a Foundation grant which would be interesting to review if possible just to get clarity over the amounts, milestones and all of the details alongside some specifics of RnDAO participation and such. Apologies if that information had already been shared but we do consider it necessary to make a fully informed decision.

  • Negation Game - Although the grant request clearly states the difference between the milestones, we do think some more focus should be put on the Negation Game itself, which is the primary tool we’re discussing. The milestone breakdown of the proposal could even be framed as 3 separate proposals. In that sense, we’d like to see some more efforts put towards making this highly adoptable and improving the overall UX.

Certainly Scroll can benefit in particular from this agreement but we do think that a positive signal could come from seeing adoption in other ecosystems as well and not solely rely on Scroll’s delegate participation.

We honestly find the shared metrics a bit concerning in terms of the level of delegate engagement. Since the idea is to enhance the quality of the decision-making, we’d like to have a few examples of this in the proposals we’ve voted on or have some insights on this aspect. It’s also worth mentioning that the GCR included compensations for adoption which they should be factored in if they aren’t already.

It’s good to see some improvements in the pipeline as well so we think that this grant could benefit from having Negation Game and the research itself going in parallel tracks. It’d be also interesting to explore the possibility of incorporating already existing prediction market mechanisms into the tool.

We’re happy to keep on discussing the proposal if that’s the route the DAO takes. But overall we think that there should be an intersection between a potentially groundbreaking research and a highly usable product.

3 Likes