Wooooo! 
This has been brewing for a long time — so great to see it finally hit the forum! Here’s some initial thoughts on the proposal and some more context on my personal opinion regarding alliances, token swaps, and general DAO-to-DAO collaboration:
On D2D Collaboration:
In the Distribution of Ownership Workstream post that I just published last week, I dive into the concept of “ownership” and the forms it can take. I reference Pat Rawson’s Ownership in Cryptonetworks piece, which compares DAOs to corporate control networks. The (very paraphrased) argument made is that to secure a “a self-sovereign, fiscally and politically decentralized control network” DAOs must “optimize for crypto-institutional resilience” by “distributing ownership as skin-in-the-game to squadlike entities with more specialized objectives is the key long-term problem to solve.”
This temperature check can be considered Radicle’s first foray into understanding what “crypt-institutional resilience” is for our DAO and I believe there is no better partner to be exploring this with than Gitcoin! I envision these committees evolving to become cross-DAO squads that are delegated responsibility, influence, and funding to pursue specialized objectives that support Radicle and Gitcoin’s long-term visions / missions.
Additionally, the distribution of governing power is very important for the The Next Phase of the RadicleDAO. Distributing influence within the project among aligned ecosystem stakeholders will support a more active and decentralized governing community.
Initial Proposal Feedback
Where would we envision reporting on this progress in the Radicle community? What do you think @shelb_ee ?
Perhaps number of proposals isn’t the best metric, but perhaps some metric to measure the quality of the committee’s collaboration. I believe the opportunity here is to use this alliance to co-fund and collaborate on objectives the support the funding of public goods & open-source software. The committees should be judged on the thought, time, and effort put into strategizing around these shared objectives.
In terms of the committee formation, I’d be interested to know who from the community is interested in participating. The role isn’t a passive one — it will require active & strategic participation. I’m interested in participating personally, but would love to know if this intrigues anybody else!
For org design purposes (@ange @louiegrey) I see this “Public Goods Alliance Committee” as another type of entity that needs to be taken into consideration in our DAO organizational design. I could see it technically being in the same category as the EGF and Grants committees (potentially following similar compensation structures…?). Let’s just be sure to include it in our design process.
All in all, extremely in favor of this experiment. I’ll be looking forward to diving into more details in the next phase of governance!
Also thanks to @shelb_ee @yorgos and @cloudhead for the review and feedback here and for the work that went into this proposal @schlabach @HelloShreyas 