Heya, ZER8, great to be here, I am an independent delegate with over 4 years practical and on the ground experience in DAOs, since 2020 I’ve been full time contributing to DAOs(1Hive, TEC, Across, UMA, Gitcoin, Arbitrum and now Scroll as a delegate). By training I have a BA in telecomm engineering and I’m also a part time creative in the field of art x fashion.
I enjoy being at the edge of the public goods space, exploring ideas, projects and
Project I’ve build or participated in for more than 1 year:
Part of the Buzz swarm at 1Hive- outreach, marketing
NFBeez- a 2022-2024 experiment into 100% decentralized and collaborative work between 10 artists and 3 developers.
Contributor and them team lead in the FDD workstream at Gitcoin- where I was in charge of reviewing all the grant applications for three seasons. Helped save over 1m$ in potentially wasted capital during these three seasons.
Solo working on Convex Funding - a novel allocation methodology that is optimizes for real impact in grant programs
Still a 1Hive member and currently I am a HelloMother core team member and contributor working at the intersection of the latest AI frameworks and community.
Enjoy testing innovative dapps, protocols, projects and joining experiments, conceptual work just for fun!
Motivation
The web3 governance space is mostly composed and influenced by specialized governance teams at the moment(which is not bad overall, but suboptimal) and I believe independent, neutral delegates can provide the optimal balance to avoid the capture of the space by entities who have gained embedded influence over time.
My two main goals in Scroll:
to help maintain this balance, provide critical feedback on proposals, discussions and always try to opt for positive-sum outcomes on anything related to funding, mechanisms, etc
help promote the Scroll ecosystem, onboard people into Scroll and overall support the ecosystem where I can
Disclosure.
As an ETH Maxi, I am a delegate in both Arbitrum and Scroll because technically they are the most advanced and at a DAO level embody the correct bundle of values and ethos of decentralization.
My rationale on the 1st proposal: Research to Inform a Builder Support Strategy
Usually DAOs don’t take time to do market research to decide what’s are the optimal strategies going forward, this approach by RnDAO should in theory and if the research provides valuable provide the inputs that are needed to make informed decisions in the current market landscape(which is more and more dynamic) .
I voted YES, because the proposal is low cost/low risk and for the reasons mentioned above.
My rationale on the DAO Delegate Accelerator proposal
I randomly had this idea during a call and strongly believe the proposal can help Scroll in two ways:
-giving Scroll more mindshare in the overall L2 landscape because of the uniqueness of the proposal, it only needs marketing and amplification and will make Scroll shine more.
-training existing and new delegates on the best practices of delegate duties
My rationale on the Community Council Formation Proposal
Having a Community Council is an important step in ensuring the Local Nodes program delivers as intended, optimizes iteratively and will also help sustain mini grants for regions that are not in the scope of the Local Nodes proposal.
The structure of the council is optimal in my opinion as it balances between foundation, community and the dao, the responsabilities are well laid out as well. The fact that the submissions for the council seats are public is another aspect of the proposal that makes me confident in the decision making
My rationale on the Research on Better DAO Decisions & Aligned Incentives: Research on Carroll Mechanisms Proposal
I voted YES because the budget is quite lean for innovative research in this nieche, the proposal is an investment, not a grant.
The main aspect that give me confidence in the benefits/outcomes of the proposal in Scroll DAO is the fact that Scroll leads many the governance game in L2 spectrum via:
-the delegate accelerator
-the way it structures and elects it’s councils
-generally the way governance is participatory and well designed
=> I see this proposal as crucial step in the governance & allocation game puzzle that Scroll has started to solve and has chances to benefit/disrupt a trillion dollar industry!
My rationale on the Security Subsidy Program for Scroll Builders Proposal
I voted YES because this type of ecosystem support via audits has become a ‘standard’ practice in the industry hence Scroll needs a program in place to be able to compete and support it’s builders. The two service(marketplace) providers that will help builders secure audits have experience in the field and are actually at the fore front of it.
I voted YES because Feynman is a lean, no-funding core upgrade that hardens the fee model, improves EVM compatibility, and simplifies contract, I see it as an investment in resilience and developer experience, not a spend. The path mirrors Euclid (open, audited, executed by Up Labs with Security Council oversight).
The GCR program is not perfect, but compared to other iterations from other DAOs or L2s its second iteration is superior, metrics are not perfect, but can be improved in the next one.
I will be voting for it as I believe governance contributions, collective intelligence and ideas are what shaped our space into what it is today! Scroll delegates have contributed value to the DAO in good faith without expecting financial rewards!
I voted YES for the reasons outlined above and for the fact that the team is responsive, quick to correct and to update as well. Confident they are the people that could take this program to the next level!
I am voting FOR Avantgarde because I like their offer more, it’s flexible, they want to collaborate with other service providers and have been very open for feedback from delegates. They and kpk are both battle tested treasury management sp.