An Evolution of Radicle’s Brand(s)



Today, we use the term “Radicle” to refer to:

  1. Our organization/ecosystem, henceforth referred to as “the Radicle ecosystem”;
  2. Our original product / protocol, henceforth referred to as “the Radicle product”.

Over the past several years, these two things – the Radicle ecosystem and the Radicle product – have diverged. Today they mean very different things to different people. The result of this is confusion and lack of clarity for virtually all stakeholders, including DAO contributors, community members, and prospective users.


We propose a brand split. More specifically, that we use different names, properties & design languages for the Radicle product & the Radicle ecosystem.

You may find more details on this proposal below. We appreciate any thoughtful feedback & reactions after reading this proposal in full.

The problem we’re solving

Today, we use “Radicle” to refer to two different things:

  1. Our organization/ecosystem, henceforth referred to as “the Radicle ecosystem”
    This “Radicle” is governed and funded by the $RAD token. Most people think of this ecosystem as including formal entities like the Radicle Foundation, teams like Drips, governance, paid contributors, and community members, and products like the Radicle product & Drips.

  2. Our original product / protocol, henceforth referred to as “the Radicle product”
    This “Radicle” enables developers to securely collaborate on software over a peer-to-peer network.

Over time, the Radicle ecosystem and the Radicle product have become two increasingly separate things. Today, they have a different mission, different objectives, different stakeholders, and perhaps most importantly, different communities with different viewpoints on large topics such as cryptocurrencies, software development, open source software management, and countless other areas.

In fact, we’re quickly arriving in a place where there are not just two increasingly distinct efforts in place, but three:

  1. the Radicle ecosystem
  2. the Radicle product
  3. Drips, the Radicle ecosystem’s funding product

In the current state, there is widespread confusion and lack of clarity for virtually all of our stakeholders, including DAO contributors, community members, and prospective users. This confusion is being exacerbated as a result of the organizational shift (referred to as org shift going forward) underway to spin out teams from the Radicle Foundation to the DAO.

While this org shift has been in the works for a long time, it was not clear until recently the extent to which the above divergence has occurred. Therefore, it was not clear how the Radicle ecosystem should be organized and named to facilitate the most accurate understanding of everything that is happening within the Radicle ecosystem and most importantly, with its two products, the Radicle product and Drips.

It is clear now. As a result, we believe now is the ideal time to execute a brand split, which will be described in further detail below.

Our recommendation

We recommend undergoing a brand split wherein we use different names, marks, properties & design languages for:

  1. the Radicle product
  2. the Radicle ecosystem.

More specifically, the recommendation is to henceforth:

  1. use “Radicle” to refer to the code collaboration product only
  2. for the Radicle ecosystem to adopt a new name derived from the governance token, $RAD.

The working name for the Radicle ecosystem is RAD Society. We are also discussing alternatives such as RAD Collective. We plan to align on a name in the coming weeks and would love your feedback.

In addition, we recommend that the sprout emoji and sprout mark be adopted by the Radicle ecosystem and for the Radicle product to stop using this mark. As a result of the above changes, the following channel reorganization is recommended:

Future state & announcement

Our recommendation is that this brand split is done with the highest urgency. More specifically, we recommend that it is publicly announced at or right before ETH Denver, in early March 2023, with several aspects of the realignment completed and/or well underway.

Post-brand split, there are effectively three different things that need to be branded & marketed - the DAO/ecosystem, the Radicle product, and Drips. There will be major implications for several teams & contributors, and in fact several of these stakeholders participated in the creation of this proposal!

Next steps

If this recommendation is well-received and adopted, the brand split will be led by Marketing, with direction & details outlined on this forum. It will be executed by Radicle ecosystem contributors in our product, community, operations & marketing teams.

More specifically, we will decide which channels will be overseen by which teams & orgs, what the timelines are, what is in scope, and what the relative priority is to develop each property. In future posts, we also plan to provide more details on how this work will be planned, organized, budgeted & measured. The brand split project will be funded by the Foundation.

It’s also worth mentioning that this proposed brand split has implications for the impending Transition to the DAO work. The Core Dev Org WG will be presenting an action plan next week to discuss the changes that will be made to the Core Development Org proposal and associated transition work.

Whew, that’s it! We suspect this may be a lot to process. It’s a big shift, and one we do not undergo lightly.

Our request is that you share any feedback & comments on this proposal at your earliest convenience so that we may adjust accordingly & proceed with necessary planning & execution on a timely basis.

-Sean, Ele, Alexis & Abbey


Thanks Sean, this is great.

I’d like to add some details in terms of how this will affect the Radicle Clients team:

  • It will now just be the Radicle team.
  • It will have its own communication platform (TBD with the team) and twitter (@radicle), which will be focused on the Radicle stack & heartwood, and not shared with drips/the dao.
  • We’ll have to come up with a new logo; for this we’ll be doing a rebrand
  • will stay as it is, focused on code-collab
  • Everything else stays the same, more or less

Exciting times!


Hey Sean,

What an announcement! :exploding_head:
Really like the idea of the split and the how it has been defined, it surely will give more clarity to everyone.

Re: the Radicle Product to drop the sprout emoji and the Radicle Ecosystem to retain it.
It seemed to me that the sprout was always more a symbol of the network emergence and the distributed nature of code collaboration. Probably there is another good emoji or logo that can replace it, but would appreciate to hear if there are any specific thoughts that led to this decision.

Also if Radicle will be referring to the Radicle Product solely, how will Drips be keeping a connection to the Radicle ecosystem or RAD: Society ? Will this be signaled by the sprout emoji/logo?

Again, thanks for the post and looking forward to this! :muscle:


The reason for the sprout going to the ecosystem is that it’s very much tied to the $RAD token logo, which belongs to the DAO. I also think it was a good fit for the product, but it does make a lot of sense for the ecosystem as a whole too. Maybe Sean has more thoughts on this.

Regarding your other point: drips and radicle don’t need to keep a connection to the ecosystem/radsociety per se. They are projects that are backed by the dao, nothing more, so it’s likely that there will be an indication of that on the website somewhere, but not in the branding/logo/name.

This is why we’re renaming the DAO to something other than “Radicle”, but unfortunately again, because it’s very hard to rename a token symbol, we’re opting to keep RAD as the token. The fact that it is a prefix of “Radicle” is more of an acceptable downside than a benefit.


Nice one @sean! It makes a lot of sense in my opinion, so I am fully supportive.

Next steps for Drips look good too. It’s only the new chat we need to discuss and likely the GH org, as Drips is under radicle-dev at the moment.


+1 on the move and it couldn’t come soon enough! :clap:

Some thoughts:

I expected “ecosystem” to refer to entities beyond the limits of “our organization”. Companies usually talk about their product’s ecosystems as environments that include customers, partners, investors, contributors, and others (e.g. media, etc.) - and these aren’t governed by $RAD - so I think it would help to be explicit here about whether we’re talking about one vs. the other.

It sounds like “RAD society” would include anyone that cares about the token even if not part of the DAO?
And “RAD Collective” sounds more like a name for the DAO itself?

1 Like

Thanks for your support and reply!

I think it’s a really good point you’re making here:

I do think we are currently thinking about the org & the ecosystem as having the same name, even though yes, they’re two different things. Do you have a suggestion on what the right thing is to do here? Any examples you can share from other ecosystems & orgs that do this in a clearer way than I’ve spelled out here?

I think we only need to worry about coming up with a name for our org. We don’t control the everything around / outside of it anyway (ecosystem), so focusing on just the org name, I guess… Perhaps the token is a good filter for what’s part of that org ?

Something that I’m not seeing here is how these organisations are expected (or not) to interact with each other – perhaps that’s part of the DAO organisation topic instead.

As these parts get split out, are there contact points for regrouping? Does the product intend to interact with and use Drips? Does the “Collective” intend to encourage people to use Radicle & Drips? These are the kinds of questions that come to mind :slight_smile:

1 Like

I’m currently putting together a post that will expand on some those points @fintohaps!

1 Like

This looks great—I agree with the others that this will dramatically simplify the scope of a lot of work. And with the DAO/ecosystem going in a more generic “we fund cool internet technologies” route, that opens up some really cool opportunities for brand journalism around the spaces where specific products operate, like Bear Is For Builders, or technical educational content that spans products, like Setting up a sovereign and funded open-source organization with Radicle and Drips.

Fingers crossed that we’ll be able to talk about this kind of content some more!

Speaking of which—a fairly tactical question on the Radicle Digest, not that the stakes for it are super high: Do we think this will become a Radicle product channel, if they choose to utilize it, or will it be absorbed into the ecosystem? @shelb_ee already has the governance-specific newsletter, but maybe there’s an opportunity to have product-agnostic newsletter with updates from across the ecosystem.

I like how Urbit defines their ecosystem as both the core orgs (Tlon and Urbit Foundation) and external orgs, products, and services built on top of Urbit. While these distinctions aren’t clear on their ecosystem pages, they more concretely describe the relationships elsewhere on their site. It’s not a perfect parallel, as they aren’t a DAO and only have one product, but it’s some proof that an ecosystem can consist of both its core orgs and the wider base of partners/users.


this is great. “Rad Society” is fun. I usually associate “collectives” with more creative groups operating as a single entity (both traditionally and in crypto) and Radicle doesn’t really have any “collective” components in the same way. perhaps I could cast votes for “Rad World,” “Rad Web,” or “Rad Internet.”

Radicle = code collab
Drips = funding protocol
Rad ____ = DAO, governance, token… grants as well?

does the Rad ___ control the budgets and direction of other two entities? will be nice to get this all ironed out. excited for 2023.


Thanks for your feedback and questions, @joelhans! Will address below.

It’s a bit too early to tell exactly what will happen here in the longer term, but in the short term I recommend we pause the Radicle Digest. The distribution list is pretty small, so I’d like to see us focus on some more foundational pieces of the strategy. I’d definitely encourage us to continue putting out the governance newsletter.

Thanks for this! Will definitely take a look!

1 Like

Thank you for putting this post together @sean !

I am a fan of the brand split proposal as it provides a lot more clarity on how Radicle operates and the future vision. I’m also curious to see how the orgs will interact/align together and what the key objectives will look like for each, but I know more information on this will be coming out soon.

I also prefer RAD Society to RAD Collective :+1:t3:


Hey all!

Wanted to share that the Org Design Working Group has put together an update regarding next steps for our “transition to the DAO” in light of our brand and org evolutions. I think it touches on a couple of questions shared in this thread, so happy to dive in deeper in the comments there! :seedling:

1 Like