GM!
During last week’s co-design call on Wednesday and the Proposal Bonanza on Thursday, we explored ways to improve how Scroll DAO coordinates internally (a.k.a. how we work together).
Big thanks to everyone who contributed ideas, asked hard questions, or just showed up with curiosity.
(@eugene @coffee-crusher @Miana @connormcmk @SEEDGov @GozmanGonzalez @mexi).
This post is my personal reflection and synthesis from those sessions, with three concrete mini-experiments we could pilot over the next 3 months. 
These experiments are low-risk prototypes designed to help us:
- Make responsibilities more visible
- Improve internal communication
- Reduce duplication of effort
- Strengthen accountability
- Onboard new contributors more easily
Each experiment includes a tentative objective and can evolve through feedback. We’ll keep learning and we’ll keep iterating.
BTW, we’ll have a follow-up session this Thursday, July 21st at 18:00 UTC (90 min) to go deeper on these ideas. All are welcome
1. Role-Based Visual Org Chart
Objective: Create a dynamic map of who’s doing what across the DAO, organized by roles (not people).
Right now, it’s hard to “see” how Scroll functions internally. A role-based org chart would give us a shared, evolving map of our operational reality — making it easier to coordinate, onboard, and understand who’s responsible for what.
This would be inspired by Holacracy, where:
- Roles, not people, are the unit of organization
- One person can hold multiple roles
- One role can be held by multiple people
- People in the same role across different circles can form learning squads
I’ve created an initial prototype in Mural here:
In the short term, we can keep updating the Org Chart Prototype (Work in Progress) we have been discussing.
In the mid-term, we could try adapting existing tools like Glassfrog, Sobol, or others. But I actually think the ideal escenario would be to connect it with Agora (@zcf ), so that just by updating roles on the forum (or elections in the voting platform), the map updates automatically. This would reduce the maintenance burden while keeping the DAO legible to newcomers and veterans alike.
2. Support Squad (Weaver + Scribe Model)
Objective: Pilot a cross-DAO team that supports coordination, documentation, and consistency across councils.
Every circle needs someone to document meetings, track agreements, and facilitate connections, but this often falls on council members already busy with operational work. 
Instead of expecting every council to handle this on their own, we could pilot a Support Squad: a transversal team that works across the entire DAO, bringing coherence and care to internal workflows.
The core of this squad would be:
- A Weaver, responsible for relational flow, connections, strategy alignment and check-ins avoiding unintentional duplication of efforts
- A Scribe, responsible for keeping agreements visible, structured, and documented to have the necessary elements for accountability
The key principle is to separate project-specific operational roles (e.g. builders, researchers) from support operational roles (tasks that every council needs). This increases flow, reduces bureaucracy, and ensures councils can stay focused without losing structure.
Over time, the squad could also include:
- Tech support roles
- Design/communication roles
- Admin or grant operations roles
This squad would attend all councils, acting as connective tissue between them, offering support as an internal service.
3. DAO General Circle Rhythms
Objective: Test a sustainable rhythm for cross-council alignment, balancing asynchronous and synchronous coordination.
Coordination requires rhythm, not just information posted in the forum.
Like a musical ensemble, even self-directed teams need moments to pause, check in, and realign.
I propose we pilot a monthly General Circle meeting, held twice on the same day to accommodate different time zones (like the current Weekly DAO & Governance Call)
The difference is that, in this monthly meeting the lead of each council + weaver + scribe + foundation + labs (+ an extra representative from each council to ensure the double link) must be present (or express their consent to the decisions made during that period of time).
Generally, the topics discussed tend to be governance-related rather than operational (which, in theory, occur semi-autonomously within the councils). An example of this could mean redefining the area of responsibility of one council with respect to another, to avoid overlapping efforts or leaving gaps. In other words, this meeting decides who makes the decisions (with an effort to keep them as peripheral as possible).
Between meetings, there could be async methods (written updates, short videos, or curated docs) to keep information accessible without overwhelming contributors. Sync sessions, in contrast, would be used to harvest collective intelligence, not repeat announcements.
Delayed execution could be applied in optimistic proposal mode, where silence of an absent member is assumed to be consent, but the goal is to encourage them to express their opinion and raise objections in a 48 hrs window of time.
The Weaver and Scribe from the Support Squad would attend both sessions to ensure coherence and information flow between them an get the consent of everyone within the DAO General Circle.
Final Thoughts
Each of these mini-experiments is meant to be a small loop a learning cycle.
I don’t want to lock us into new rules, but to give us space to try things in practice, reflect, and build forward from lived experience.
I’ll be in the call this Thursday (July 21st at 18:00 UTC) and would love to co-facilitate deeper discussion around any of these proposals, or others you’re holding.
Let’s keep building Scroll as a space of clarity and care.
