ORIGINAL DOCUMENT

Notes:

Moderator: Prema

Note-Taker: Andrew

What we want to accomplish – answer the question: how do we want to position or describe Radicle as a whole?

Can Orgs be the thing that ties the code collab parts and Drips together?

Motivation: we want to be able to communicate the vision to new folks who are interested in contributing.

We’ll start by going around and each saying how we think about this.

Nassar – we want to allow developers to work on the Internet, similar to the flexibility of open source, but with money and compensation as well. We feel that this is a way that many people can live their best lives and make their best contribution. Code collaboration tools + funding tools enables this.

Ele – Radicle is interesting because it’s not a company. It’s 100% open source. Principles of sovereignty, (optional) anonymity. The “Decentralized Github” story is okay, even though we didn’t come up with it, and works. DAOs are open source projects with money. Radicle can help provide tools for projects like this.

Andrew – Interested in stories around enabling any person in any country with any identity to be able to contribute to software projects and find opportunities, regardless of whether they have bank accounts, or documents or local prohibitive political constraints.

Nassar – We should consider how important pseudonymity is to our vision and how it might limit us to invest resources into it. Also how primary it should be as a part of our narrative.

Ele – Thinks that censorship is still a small problem overall percentage-wise, but it’s becoming a much bigger problem fast.

Adam – It’s most important to be able to associate commits and code activity to identities.

Prema – These reputation and identity questions are coming up naturally based on the tools we’ve been building, so we should make sure that our messaging can address it. We should think about the best way to communicate that.

Nassar – I agree that pseudonymity is an important part of our tech, but should it be a primary narrative?

Ele – I do think this is an important principle, but maybe not part of our highest-level messaging/marketing.

Adam – Is Radicle “Decentralized Github” if it’s actually federated? But maybe the federated part is opt-in currently. Will the p2p parts actually work? A nice way to message this might be that we’re a federated alternative to Github rather than decentralized. Make Radicle easy to self-host and run on their own servers.

Nassar – Should we be focused more on DAOs as customers versus coders interested in self-hosted tools? DAOs have a lot of traction right now, from a money perspective at least.

Adam – Federated is different from fully p2p. We should take a decision on whether we want to try to communicate the project as fully p2p or whether we should be messaging that it is federated instead.