[RFC] Strategic Alignment Initiative (SAI) for VeloraDAO

Research and Discussion
1

Abstract

As VeloraDAO continues to grow and mature, we are seeing strong signs of progress across governance participation, contributor activity, and structural development. Initiatives such as the Governance Task Force (GTF), the Delegate Incentive Program (DIP), and the Velora Growth Committee (VGC) have contributed to improved coordination, transparency, and engagement across the DAO.

Given this positive trajectory, we believe now may be an appropriate time to ask a broader question of the community:

Should VeloraDAO define a shared strategic focus for the year ahead?

This would not be a binding or rigid framework, but rather a way to align governance, contributor efforts, and protocol initiatives around a set of agreed-upon priorities—clarifying what the DAO is collectively trying to achieve over the next 12 months.

Before considering any formal process, we would like to gather feedback and better understand how the community views this idea.

Goals

This post is intended to start an open and constructive conversation. We are not proposing anything specific at this time, but we are interested in whether the DAO believes there is value in pursuing a shared strategic direction, and if so, how such a process might be designed.

We are particularly interested in community input on the following:

  • Would VeloraDAO benefit from identifying a small number of strategic priorities for the year?
  • If so, what kinds of outcomes should we prioritize (e.g., onboarding users, increasing protocol revenue, expanding brand awareness, strengthening internal governance)?
  • How might a process to define and align on these priorities be structured in a way that is open, inclusive, and flexible?
  • Are there potential downsides to consider, and how could they be mitigated?

Why This May Be Worth Exploring

A shared strategic focus could offer a number of benefits, such as:

  • Providing clearer direction for proposals, funding decisions, and contributor work
  • Helping delegates and working groups coordinate efforts around shared high-level goals
  • Making it easier to evaluate progress and identify where further support is needed
  • Encouraging more proactive and outcome-driven governance

That said, it’s equally important to consider the risks, such as reduced flexibility or added complexity if not implemented thoughtfully.

Next Steps

At this stage, we are simply seeking input. If there is sufficient interest and alignment, we would be open to working with the community to explore what a lightweight, community-led process could look like.

We encourage all delegates, contributors, and community members to share their thoughts in the comments below. Your feedback will help determine whether this is something the DAO should pursue further.

Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to hearing your perspectives.

3 Likes
2

Hi @Curia team!

This is an excellent initiative, and it has our full support. While we believe delegates and community members should remain free to propose their own initiatives based on evolving circumstances, we also believe that the DAO as a whole must establish its strategic objectives, determine how to implement them, and develop a concrete action plan to bring them to life.

With some nuances compared to the idea you outlined, we at SEEDGov —in our role as the Governance Task Force— are planning to launch a framework in the near future (end of Q3 or beginning of Q4) to convene the entire DAO —delegates, tokenholders, and all stakeholders— to collectively define the DAO’s strategic objectives for the short, medium, and long term. The goal is to discuss how to implement them and prioritize initiatives with the greatest potential impact.

This will require careful planning, the creation of clear and accessible materials to facilitate community participation, coordination of collective efforts, and ultimately, analysis and synthesis of all contributions into a clear set of strategic goals and implementation tracks.

We are therefore fully aligned with this proposal and excited to contribute to its design and implementation, as it aligns closely with a key priority we had already identified within our scope:

We have studied the unsuccessful experience of Arbitrum’s Strategic Objective Setting (SOS) process, which is yet to be finished and still impossible to assess its impact. We believe there are valuable lessons to draw from that process that can help us build a more effective and tailored initiative for VeloraDAO.

If it seems right to you, and depending on the feedback this thread receives from the community, we’d be happy to communicate to coordinate and exchange ideas with you to jointly shape a stronger, aligned initiative that can further the DAO’s development.

3 Likes
3

We wholeheartedly agree on defining a shared strategic focus for the year ahead. Any initiative that aligns DAO and contributor efforts with broader protocol initiatives/priorities is a positive in our eyes.

Would VeloraDAO benefit from identifying a small number of strategic priorities for the year?

Absolutely. Scroll’s governance team publishes quarterly goals broken up by operations, ecosystem growth, global community, governance iteration. We could consider a similar structure for Velora, broken up by our desired priorities.

If so, what kinds of outcomes should we prioritize

We’d be in favor of prioritizing onboarding users and expanding brand awareness at the least; those seem like two of the most high-impact things to focus on with the rebrand.

How might a process to define and align on these priorities be structured in a way that is open, inclusive, and flexible?

We could use a forum poll with the best options that we brainstorm here to get the wider community’s feedback. We don’t think a formal Snapshot vote is necessary for this, but we’re not completely opposed to the idea. A forum poll is a lightweight way to make sure the community’s voice is heard.

Are there potential downsides to consider, and how could they be mitigated?

Time-wasting. Sometimes these sorts of efforts can be overlooked by the community, especially if progress isn’t regularly updated. We’d need to make sure that follow-up posts are detailed & showcase direct links/metrics to show that progress is being made on the priorities. Something similar to Laita’s update threads which are easy to follow and concise. Community calls could also dedicate ~5mins or so toward highlighting progress here.

It seems that the SEED team is working along these lines already, so we’re happy to support their work and look forward to reading the deliverables. It could also help to clarify how often these priorities will be revisited in case some metric favored by a community member isn’t chosen for the first cycle.

3 Likes
4

Thanks @Curia for proposing this RFC

This is exciting to see taking shape, this kind of community-driven prioritization is exactly what the DAO needs in order to channel our collective energy into the highest-impact areas over the next year. By convening delegates, contributors and service-providers around some clear objectives feels we’ll finally have a north star to guide growth, governance and ecosystem efforts in lock-step.

From the VGC’s perspective, imo VLR’dao’SAI :wink: could help us synchronize our efforts with the broader DAO vision, pure coordinated wins and again through DIP, delegates can rally their voting power and proposals around these shared goals and the GTF can steward the facilitation process to keep us on track. :paw_prints: :leopard:

What if we kick off with a lightweight “daoSAI forum workshop" in late Q3 or early Q4 to co-define these priorities this gives everyone time to prepare and come up with some ideas which also gives our GTF time to propose the framework they working on…

Fully in support and look forward to see this developing further.

2 Likes
5

This is a good idea. My 2 cents on it:

Adding to what others have already said, we could draw inspiration from Lido’s approach, with their GOOSE and Hasu’s submission.

The DAO would benefit from having high-context contributors like @Laita proposing/helping to shape the core strategy, laying the foundation for the discussion around what the end proposal would be.

3 Likes
6

Thanks for surfacing @Curia

I agree with the spirit of intent and that alignment around goals/objectives is important for any organization to grow.

I believe in the work that @SEEDGov and look forward to seeing the aforementioned structure they are developing.

I agree with @boardroom that the model from Scroll is effective as it sets practical goals and provides regularly green/yellow/red status reports on their progress.

A caution to all of this is that we don’t create “plans for plans” and ensure that whatever goals we set are SMART and focus on creating sustainability and growth for the wider ecosystem.

I would also suggest we, as stakeholders, be willing to adapt and change and be willing to identify and move quickly from what isn’t working and focus on what is. Mike Tyson said it best “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face”

LFG!

2 Likes
7

We are in support of this SAI as a whole overall because it represents a necessary step forward in ensuring that Velora operates with a clear, shared vision. As the DAO ecosystem continues to grow and mature, it’s critical that the community aligns around common objectives to avoid fragmented efforts and inefficiencies.

Overall, the SAI will enable better resource prioritization and transparency. We think a transparent alignment framework gives the community confidence that decisions are being made systematically and with accountability, reinforcing trust in the DAO’s governance.

Finally, this should position the DAO to be more adaptive and resilient in a rapidly evolving ecosystem.

Agree with many of the prior comments and look forward to final structures that is being developed right now.

Thanks to @Curia team for this proposal!

1 Like
8

I understand the importance of having a shared strategic focus for the year ahead.

I’ll just add a few points from a KOL and a marketing company co-founder: Velora is currently going through a rebranding phase, I think many users are still confused so user education should be a key priority right now.

A few things could be more clear to the wider community: Is Velora betting on becoming a front-end platform for traders or is it a back-end infra with the best liquidity for others to build around?

If we are a front-end app, we need to focus on UX/UI.

If we’re a back-end infra, we need to focus on integrations and partnerships.

This is a strategic question to understand.

On top, for me, what makes a project successful depends on many things, but ultimately, it comes down to whether the project becomes part of the DeFi narrative, something users believe in and rally around.

I included a formula I’ve been using to help identify narrative-worthy projects: but in short:

Narrative Score = [(1.5Ă— Innovation Ă— Simplicity) + (1.5Ă— Community Ă— Simplicity) + (Liquidity Ă— Tokenomics) + Incentives] Ă— Market_Conditions

Link for more details here: Scoring Crypto Narratives: My Formula

Velora is innovative but competition is tough. It’s a simple narrative but not the hottest trend in town.

That’s why community comes first. If we focus on educating users and building something that truly speaks to them, that’s a long-term win.

It’s also good example to look at Lido goal, which laid out 1 to 3 years goal, and Scroll, which recently broke down their targets by quarter.

Anyway, since Seedgov is working on setting the goals for Q3 and Q4, I’d love to follow the updates and contribute more when they publish.

And I run PinkBrains ,a Creator Studio that focused on elevating quality projects through authentic representation. Always open to collaborating, especially on user education and brand awareness.

4 Likes
9

Thanks @Curia for this RFC—we appreciate this conversation as it’s important for the DAO to have directionality top of mind.

The pros of strategic alignment are self-evident, so we won’t touch on that point. However, we would like to highlight a cautionary point around coordination with a program like SAI. Our position is that existing entities in the DAO (Laita, VGC, GTF) should already be taking care of this function.

While it’s certainly positive for the DAO as a whole to ideate and reflect on the proper path forward for Velora, it’s important to have a, per se, captain at the helm. The crux of Velora’s success primarily comes from Laita. They’ve done a good job over the past handful of months explicating the vision behind Velora’s new direction. As long as they sustain periodic updates and solicit community feedback (as is the recent case here), we believe that the strategic alignment is properly being addressed. In supplement, the presence of the GTF provides enough coverage regarding DAO-based operations, along with the VGC handling growth elements. Therefore, to prevent too many overlapping initiatives, we’d advise not having a separate body taking care of strategic alignment directives—rather, the three mentioned entities should coordinate to publish periodic updates around strategy and vision. The job of the delegates will then be to give feedback.

To those ends, we’d be keen on waiting for @SEEDGov’s intended post as opposed to starting a new program like SAI:

2 Likes
10

Thanks @AranaDigital couldn’t have put it in a better way, I do share some of those concerns but envisioned a somewhat alignment of the 3 mentioned with the overall effort of this RFC rather then a separate north star, we definetly have to be carefull not to fragment vision,

@Laita has been doing an awesome job imo and VGC should do their best to align with the same effort as well as GTF which I hope would have a similar approach in the their future to come post.

Look forward to see how this discussion develops!

2 Likes
11

We support the core idea of this Strategic Alignment Initiative (SAI). Clearly defined strategic priorities enhance coordination, efficiency, and transparency within VeloraDAO.

We echo @SEEDGov ’s caution from Arbitrum’s Strategic Objective Setting (SOS) experience, which took over six months without effective consensus. This highlights the importance of structuring strategic processes carefully. Or, we could also take some essence of Lido’s GOOSE style, with high-context contributors, as @jameskbh described.

We also suggest distinguishing two strategic alignment frameworks:

  • Long-Term Strategy: Requires extensive research, creativity, and deep community discussions, driven by strong leadership or thorough consensus.
  • Seasonal Strategic Intent: A leaner, flexible approach suitable for short-term priorities, allowing rapid decisions based on rough consensus.

From our point of view, seasonal strategic alignment looks relatively easier to start.

To effectively implement either framework, we recommend beginning not with direct strategy discussions, but with a clear, shared understanding of our current state. It is essential that the DAO first reaches consensus about where we stand today, what our challenges are, what has worked, and what hasn’t. Without this baseline alignment, strategic discussions risk becoming fragmented, as differing perspectives could lead to confusion rather than clarity.

1 Like
12

We want to thank @Curia for bringing this very important and timely topic to the DAO.

Our perspective is similar to that of @AranaDigital:

The direction of the protocol is very much spearheaded by @Laita while the DAO is led by @SEEDGov as the GTF. That said, we do believe the DAO is ready to find a clearer focus, and so we’re glad to see this is on the agenda for the GTF.

The role of the DAO itself and its contributions vis-a-vis Laita has been a frequent topic of discussion within the VGC as the Committee has iteratively been figuring out how to best contribute to the protocol. I think our conclusion is that, rather than driving too many initiatives that require input and work from Laita, the DAO’s contributors and the VGC should be viewed as an extension of Laita to support the team in ongoing campaigns and initiatives, including in key areas like marketing.

TL;DR is Laita outlines roadmap in consultation with the DAO, whose contributors support implementation and success by identifying and carrying out adjacent 80/20 activities. That is, take the roadmap, identify key activities that we believe have the highest ROI to support said roadmap, and execute. We do like the idea of having @SEEDGov lead seasonal sprints for the DAO (as mentioned e.g. by @Tane), through the VGC and possibly with a small grant pool available for retro contributions by DAO participants.

Thanks also to all the delegates for participating in the discussion, great to see so many provide input!

2 Likes
13

I like the idea, Having measurable metrics and goals is fundamental for the success of any organisation. This will probably look like a mix of SOS and Optimism collectives - seasonal intenents.

The DEX/ agg space is highly competitive; the focus should be, IMO, to get more volume and users. Velora, needs a good level of user onboarding and brand awareness campaigns, especially after the rebrand.

@SEEDGov, what are the key take aways from your study?

14

Thank you all for the thoughtful, constructive, and inspiring feedback. It’s incredibly motivating to see this level of engagement and care for the direction of VeloraDAO.

@SEEDGov @boardroom @citizen42 @PGov @Tane @Baer_DAOplomats
We appreciate your support and the valuable suggestions around goal-setting frameworks such as Lido’s GOOSE, Scroll’s quarterly goals, and seasonal strategic sprints. We fully agree that having clear, actionable, and measurable priorities can help improve coordination, resource allocation, and the DAO’s overall impact. The point about starting with a shared understanding of where we are today, before diving into goal-setting, is also well taken.

@AranaDigital
Thank you for raising important points around clarity of roles and avoiding duplication. We fully agree that existing groups like Laita, the VGC, and the GTF are already doing critical work in shaping the direction of the DAO. Our intention with this initiative is not to create a new silo, but rather to support and align with those existing efforts. We’re taking extra care to ensure that what we are proposing complements the work that is already happening, rather than overlapping with it.

@Ignas
You raised a very important strategic question about the positioning of Velora, whether it is evolving into a front-end product or a backend infrastructure layer. This distinction will have major implications for how we prioritize UX, partnerships, and messaging. We also really appreciate your insight around narrative-building, community strength, and user education, especially in the context of the rebrand.

1 Like
15

@Sov @jameskbh
Thank you for the emphasis on focus and realism. We agree that any strategic alignment process must avoid becoming just another “plan for a plan.” SMART goals, regular updates, and a willingness to adapt are key. The reminder to track progress transparently and shift direction if needed is something we absolutely intend to carry forward.

@Avantgarde
We’re encouraged to see shared interest in coordination between Laita, the GTF, and the VGC. Rather than creating a new direction, we see this initiative as a way to help bring everyone together more intentionally around a set of shared outcomes. The idea of seasonal or quarterly touchpoints, supported by the GTF and amplified by VGC contributors, is one that we hope to help move forward in collaboration.

Next, we’re in the process of developing a clearer version of the proposal that outlines how we think VeloraDAO can move forward strategically. Once we’ve drafted it, we plan to collaborate with SEEDGov and adapt it based on their upcoming framework. This way we can be sure that the process remains aligned with existing DAO structures and that the final outcome brings the most value to the protocol and community.

Thanks again to everyone who contributed. Your input is helping shape the next steps for VeloraDAO, and we look forward to continuing this work together with all of you.

1 Like
16

The main pain point we’ve identified from Arbitrum’s SOS case is the lack of coordination between the Lab/Foundation and the DAO. This disconnect led DAO members to propose strategic objectives that weren’t necessarily aligned with the roadmap of the core team — the group with the most ownership and context around the project.

We must avoid this situation. Otherwise, the DAO risks spending time and effort designing strategic goals that end up being purely symbolic, simply because they’re not aligned with the vision or trajectory of the Foundation and Laita, who have been leading protocol development and vision since day one.

This initial coordination is essential. The DAO should act as a complementary force — filling gaps and amplifying the core team’s efforts. To do so, it must first clearly understand the direction, visión and mid/long term priorities being driven by the Foundation and Laita, and then the DAO can design strategic objectives that create real, high-impact value for the protocol.

2 Likes
17

You’ve raised a great point here.

I believe we can find product-market fit (PMF) in both areas. I’ve previously done some brief research comparing our own intent framework—Portikus—with others in the market, and the results were promising. You can check out the comparison table below.

Screenshot 2025-07-31 at 9.42.15 PM
Screenshot 2025-07-31 at 9.42.15 PM1650Ă—1166 126 KB

Final Thoughts on the Frameworks:

  • If you want modularity: Portikus and Anoma are your best bets for a future-proof intents layer across DeFi.

  • If you prioritize swaps right now: CoW Swap, 1inch Fusion, and UniswapX are battle-tested and optimized for trading.

  • If you’re a builder: 0x offers the most flexibility to create custom solutions.

On the front-end, we may face some challenges—especially given Hyperliquid’s support for spot tokens, their superior UI/UX, incentives, and advanced trading tools like limit orders. However, due to their limited token support, and with just a few improvements in our tokenomics and incentive structures, Velora has a strong chance to grow its market share.

I personally use Velora for my daily trades—not just because I’m a delegate/Supporter, but because of the competitive rates, low fees, and MEV-resistance it offers.

anyway Would love to discuss this topic further.

1 Like