[Discussion 🌱] Onboarding teams to Radicle Orgs

📜 Archive 🌱 Development
, ,
1

Hi All. I just wanted to get input on potentially taking a different approach to onboarding partners to Radicle Orgs.

At moment I am doing onboarding calls with partners to get them setup with an Org, but they are having a few issues:

  1. 2 hours of work for full setup
  2. Spending ~$1000 in gas
  3. something is always buggy/broken - e.g. indexing of orgs by the graph is suppppper slow
  4. Have to pull their infra teams into the mix to help with org node setup - MASSIVE BLOCKER and people keep giving up or delaying as a result.

There are also a few open questions and work being done that will address these issues:

  1. whether we will rearchitect Orgs to simplify and reduce cost
  2. onboarding flows are being improved
  3. org node deployment processes are likely to be automated
  4. we may be able to use a automatically generated url over needing user to update DNS

I don’t see there being a lot of value to onboarding Orgs right now ahead of having additional features that make it reliable for code distribution, collaboration, and driving contribution. I think it may do more harm than good. Also, I can certainly think of a number of better ways that $200k can be spent to drive growth (e.g. two more people working on the schlep of building relationships with partners).

I propose that we take a different approach that will probably set us up much better for the launch of contribution features next year.

  1. create a website that outlines a very focused pitch on DevDAOs
  2. Have projects that are building developer ecosystems fill out a form that shares any grant programmes, open positions (funded contributors), and funded issues (bounties) with us
  3. Have developers and teams that want to contribute to web3 projects fill out a form that shares details on their experience, skills, and projects they’d like to learn more about and contribute to.
  4. perhaps have a partner page that lists those that complete form and are approved as launch partners (like arbitrum - https://portal.arbitrum.one/)
  5. maybe we also add a create radicle ens name step here

this website can perhaps sit on devdao.radicle.xyz for now?

I started building this flow here: https://devdao.netlify.app/

I’ve also put rough wireframes together for what it should communicate:

image
image1440×5602 573 KB

I’ve already spoken about these issues with @abbey and @cloudhead, so this is a way of me presenting a case to both of you so we can decide on a way forward. Also welcome input from anyone else that’s interested.

1 Like
2

Thanks for sharing @nas! very useful insights to understand the current pains with Radicle Orgs.

Some questions, if I may:

Is there some description somewhere of what kind of organization / group of people would start a DevDAO? I would like to compare that to my own intuition of what that looks like.

Would these projects be similar to companies hiring Gitcoin Grants? I am trying to understand if Radicle Orgs is envisaged as a potential revenue stream for Radicle.

3

Hey @yorgos

I’m currently focused on two types of orgs that would start a devdao. web3 projects with existing treasuries that they want to deploy for grow and teams that have a proven track record in contributing to and building on these web3 projects.

Radicle Orgs is a component of the radicle stack and allows a wallet (single/multisig) to govern community repositories. I don’t think the revenue model has been decide on yet with the focus first being on adoption and growth.

1 Like