Governance and DAO Participation Recommendations

Governance and DAO Participation Recommendations


Disclaimer: Recommendations are anecdotal and experience-based rather than evidence-based. We can’t promise this will all work, but this is roughly how we think about DAOs, governance, and participation.

Format: We’ve explicitly tried to keep this as short and high-signal as possible. Writing 30 pages on this didn’t sound fun, and paradoxically, we think everyone is less likely to take something like that seriously. Still ended up pretty long, unfortunately.

Subject: This covers both governance participation and DAO participation. The two are very close to the same problem, so in the end it made sense to combine them.

Summary Table

Item Area Cost-Benefit Risk Impact Effort GovAlpha Pursue?
Encourage and Reward Mentorship DAO High Low Medium-High Low-Medium :green_circle:
Governance Onboarding Experience Governance High Low-Medium High Medium :yellow_circle: (Prefer Advisory Only)
Looking For Group Support DAO High Low Medium Low :green_circle:
Vote Stickers Governance Medium-High Low Medium-High Medium :green_circle:
Expansion of the Bounty System DAO Medium-High Low-Medium High High :large_blue_circle: (LFW excited about this)
Community Led Documentation Revamp Overlap Medium-High Low Medium-High Medium-High :red_circle: (Coordination only if needed)
Decentralise powers over communications venues DAO Medium Low-Medium Medium Low-Medium :yellow_circle:
Create Space for Informal Voice Chat DAO Medium Low Low-Medium Low :green_circle:
Hall of Fame Governance Medium Low Low-Medium Low :green_circle:
Objective Setting Overlap Low-Medium High Medium-High High :yellow_circle: (Not sure the DAOs are there yet)
Low Friction Quantitative Recognition System DAO Low-Medium Low-Medium Medium Medium-High :large_blue_circle: (Prose excited about this)
Semi-Competitive Debates Overlap Low-Medium Medium Medium Medium-High :red_circle:
Regular and Predictable Voting Periods Governance Low Low-Medium Low-Medium Low-Medium :green_circle:
Narrative Governance Activity / History Overlap Low Medium Low-Medium Medium :yellow_circle: (Trial Maybe)

Abstract Considerations

Common Sense and the Funnel

DAO engagement can be modeled as something like the marketing funnel, and participants as customers. (We don’t love how dystopian this is, but it feels correct.)

Governance and DAO engagement take place when you reach the conversion and loyalty stages of the funnel.

To increase raw numbers we have two main options

  • Intervention at higher levels. More people at the top of the funnel means more at the bottom.
  • Intervention at lower levels. A better conversion rate means more at the bottom.

Motivation And Psychology

Humans are humans. A great deal of study has gone into figuring out why people make the decisions that they do. [McClelland’s model] fits fairly well for DAOs / employment.

Wild simplification ahead!

Each person tends towards one of the following motivators in a work environment.

  • Affiliation (McClelland)
    • Motivated by connection to others.
    • Prefer working in groups
    • Avoid the risk of negative social outcomes
  • Power (McClelland)
    • Motivated by authority and control
    • Enjoy competition and debate
    • Seek high-risk situations to demonstrate ability
  • Achievement (McClelland)
    • Motivated by completing tasks
    • Seek situations that highlight their skills
    • Want to be challenged, but not too much.

Unsubstantiated speculation time!

Two more general (and usually subconscious) motivators could be described as the following:

  • Competence
    • People are motivated by the perception and reality of success
    • Everyone wants to look good!
    • Being part of a successful DAO makes you successful by association?
  • Activity
    • People are motivated by the perception and reality of activity
    • Because people want to look good, activity indicates that other people think they look good by doing things here.
    • Being part of an active DAO makes you active by association?

Political Science and DAOs

Public Recognition in Civic Participation

Democratic systems frequently use public acknowledgment to celebrate and encourage civic activities. This method shows effectiveness in increasing overall engagement.

Ownership and Civic Engagement

Stakeholding or ownership in democratic systems often correlates with higher rates of participation. Empowerment through some form of ownership fosters a greater sense of involvement.

Structured Governance

Clear rules and governance structures in democratic setups provide a framework that mitigates uncertainty and encourages participation.

Social Dynamics

Community and peer engagement play a crucial role in influencing individual participation levels in democratic systems.

The 25% Rule

Political science research indicates that when an idea garners approximately 25% support within a community, it reaches a tipping point toward mainstream acceptance.

By examining these elements, we can open discussions on how they might apply to various governance models, including DAOs, without diving into specific recommendations at this stage.

PoliSci References

Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 33–48.

Centola, D., Becker, J., Brackbill, D., & Baronchelli, A. (2018). Experimental evidence for tipping points in social convention. Science, 360(6393), 1116–1119.

The Barrier to Exit aka “Eh, fuck this.”

The barrier to exit is so much lower for DAOs than it is for any other organizational unit.

  • Available pseudonymity - No sticky reputation hit for bailing.
  • Remote - Less instinctive connection and social bonds are slower to form.
  • No contracts - No legal impediment to bailing.
  • High competition - Lots of other DAOs.

And competition doesn’t end at other DAOs

DAO engagement is competing with everything else someone might spend their spare time.

  • Social media
  • Video games
  • Hobbies
  • Family and friends
  • etc

DAO Superpowers (lessons from Maker)

DAOs and their participants have advantages traditional organizations do not.

Personal Recognition

The social barrier to communication between different levels of the implicit social hierarchy can be heavily reduced in a DAO. Compare talking to your company’s CEO versus talking to a senior DAO contributor.

The social benefit of communication, support, and recognition down the implicit hierarchy remains hugely impactful.

  • In a traditional organization, this is your boss’s job.
  • In a DAO this is everyone’s job.

There were many examples at Maker of individuals becoming prolific contributors due to recognition and support of their initial efforts from established contributors.

Extension of Trust

The extension of trust is one of the most powerful tools a DAO possesses to encourage initial and ongoing engagement. Trust gives individuals and groups the power to make a tangible impact on the future of the organization.

In a DAO, the extension of trust comes with huge benefits, and some risks. Trust can be extended much further and faster than seems wise.

LFW’s involvement with Maker essentially boiled down to:

  1. LFW demonstrates some level of ability, interest, and consistency.
  2. A specific individual in a position of power sees this and says: “You have done useful thing, here is money, please do more things.”
  3. There was no direction, requirement, or any obvious oversight.
  4. At any point LFW was blocked by a trust-gate, the following interaction took place:
    • “I need you to make these changes on x software because I don’t have the required permissions.”
    • “I’ve given you the permissions, make it happen.”

Conventionally, this is an insane way to run an organization. However, the cost of broken trust in a DAO context is much less than it appears. Traditionally, much of the cost is social and lands on the individual: “You trusted this person, and they fucked it up. This reflects badly on you.”

This does not need to be true in a DAO. Occasional broken trust can be a cost of doing business. It is strongly mitigated by the decentralization of responsibilities that results from wide trust.

The Caveats

  • Do not extend trust and resources to those who are not willing to extend it themselves.
  • Prefer to trust individuals over organizations.
  • Require transparency to the maximum possible extent - the ability to verify often reduces the need to do so.

Expectations Fulfilled

While the DAO should extend trust to individuals. The individual also implicitly extends trust to the DAO, in the form of their expectations.

To a greater or lesser extent, participants in a DAO expect:

  • A base level of transparency.
  • A real commitment to decentralization.
  • The DAO’s processes to be carried out as defined
  • Good-faith engagement from the DAOs agents

Fairly or unfairly, DAOs are expected to be better than traditional organizations in these areas. Failing to live up to these expectations will disincentivize meaningful engagement from participants. However, the opposite is also true.

Every expectation met increases the perceived legitimacy of the DAO.

Every expectation met proves to participants that their DAO is better than traditional organizations.

Recommendations In Cost-Benefit Order

Note: We’ve summarised these quite heavily to limit length here.

Encourage and Reward Mentorship

The GMC should signal a willingness to reward the mentorship of newer community members that express interest and desire to interact with DAO processes and procedures. This could be done informally, or explicitly via the bounty system.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Personal Recognition - Strongly motivates individuals to stick around, get further involved, and generally contribute to the wider DAO.
  • Affiliation - Intrinsically valuable to affiliation-motivated people.
  • The Funnel - It contributes strongly to conversion to have a willing party available to answer questions, point you to resources, etc. This strongly mitigates a weakness in resources and documentation if it is widely adopted.

Governance Onboarding Experience

Add guides/tutorials to help NOs onboard to governance as part of the NO onboarding experience. This could range from simple text guides added to existing documentation, to a more interactive onboarding flow built into a custom voting frontend.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Competence - The presence of such a flow shows that Rocket Pool takes governance engagement as seriously as it does node operation.
  • Reduces Friction - Reduces the friction for NOs to engage with governance if the instructions are provided as part of the onboarding experience.
  • Demonstrates Trust - Expresses the trust of the DAO in the node operator (to govern) from an early stage.

Looking For Group Support

Create a space for the creation of informal working groups and encourage its use and adoption into the community culture. Can be achieved via a discord channel, and an effort among the community to adopt the concept.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Affiliation - Easy for affiliation-motivated individuals to find people to work with.
  • Power - Power-motivated individuals tend to like high-risk high-value leadership positions. The encouragement of groups can provide these positions.
  • Reduce Friction - The existence of an explicit venue for this type of interaction can lower activation energy.
  • Competence - Allows individuals with a narrow skillset to contribute to composite goals.

Vote Stickers

Add two varieties of discord flair that display when:

  • A user has voted personally in all currently active votes.
  • A user’s delegate has voted in all currently active votes.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Public Recognition - People can see that you’ve engaged with the governance process.
  • Affiliation - People can feel a part of the ‘civically engaged group’
  • Social Dynamics - Visible community engagement encourages personal engagement.
  • Activity - Makes clear that voting activity is taking place.
  • Awareness - Non-voters are passively exposed to active voters.

Expansion of the Bounty System

Made up of several sub-recommendations that aim to expand the structure and use of bounties.

Bounty Board

Develop a ‘bounty board’ platform/website that is explicitly designed for bounty hunters rather than governance tracking. This would involve:

  • Addition of tags covering the type of work, recommended skills, size of the task, approximate payment level, etc to bounty proposals. Assigned by GMC.
  • Display bounties in an abbreviated but useful form on the new platform.
  • Implement sorting and filtering of available bounties via tags.

Scale Up Via Incentives

Definition and completion of bounties should be incentivized to aid adoption.

  • Bounty proposers receive rewards if their proposed bounty definition is accepted as valid by the GMC
  • Bounty proposers receive rewards if their bounty definition is completed by a bounty hunter.
  • The rewards for unfilled bounties increase over time according to some formula.

Marketing Effort

The bounty system should be marketed intentionally to both the RP community and the wider crypto community once updated.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Achievement Motivation - Bounties serve as a menu of challenges for those motivated by achievement.
  • Reduce Friction - Currently, it is hard to find and browse available bounties, this can be greatly improved.
  • Meeting Expectations - A DAO consistently creating and paying out bounties is a concrete example of the meeting of expectations.
  • Competence - An effective and adopted bounty system should contribute strongly to visible improvements in multiple areas of the Rocket Pool DAOs.

Community-Led Documentation Revamp

The devs publicly encourage and support the community to revamp and update the official Rocket Pool documentation hub. With goals to:

  • Remove out-of-date information.
  • Restructure the docs to better serve additional user requirements beyond the operation of nodes.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Reduce Friction - Makes information more easily accessible for a wider variety of use cases.
  • Competence - Out-of-date information sends a poor signal as to the professionalism of the Rocket Pool DAOs.
  • Extension of Trust - Explicit extension of trust in the wider community to achieve a major goal without organization via devs.

Decentralise powers over communications venues

Expand power and ownership of the official DAO communication platforms (Discord and Discourse) to committed members of the community.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Extension of Trust - Encourages the specific individuals’ given powers, and also signals clearly that the Rocket Pool DAOs are trusted to self-moderate.
  • Expectations Fulfilled - Signals real commitment to decentralization to both the Rocket Pool DAO, and the wider crypto community.
  • Ownership and Civic Engagement - DAO ownership of these platforms can encourage greater participation, involvement, and improvement on/of those platforms.

Create Space for Informal Voice Chat

Create spaces and culture to support informal voice chat. In practice, this might look like setting up a couple of voice channels and publicizing a handful of times across time zones for informal socializing.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Affiliation - Easy to feel part of a group with voice chat in addition to text chat.
  • Barrier to Exit - Speeds up connection, and adds costs to exiting the DAO for participants.
  • Personal Recognition - Provides a venue for casual encouragement, mentoring, etc.

Hall of Fame

Create a publicly visible ‘hall of fame’ for users that have voted in more than 90% of votes over the last period (likely fixed 3-month windows). Add hall of fame to the voting portal and/or RPIPs portal and make it available to discord bots.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Public Recognition - Users can show off that they’ve engaged consistently with the voting process.
  • Affiliation - Users can feel a part of the Hall of Fame group.
  • Achievement - Users can attempt to be present in all the Hall of Fame groups.
  • Activity - Makes clear that voting activity is taking place.

Objective Setting

Adopt periodic objective-setting exercises. These would have approximately the following stages:

  1. Informal discussion phase - with generation and discussion of ideas.
  2. Semi-formal consolidation phase - ideas consolidated into a set of actionable objectives.
  3. A formal voting phase - actionable objectives are ranked via snapshot vote.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Competence - The DAOs setting objectives allows the community to align to achieve them.
  • Achievement - Provides a clear path for achievement-motivated participants.
  • Ownership and Civic Engagement - Each successful cycle of objectives-to-outcome increases the participant’s feeling of stake and ownership in the DAO. Input into objective setting becomes meaningful because objectives have a tangible effect on outcomes.

Low Friction Quantitative Recognition System

Introduce a system in which recognition can be given and recorded via discord, and then rewarded from a pool of funds provided by the pDAO. The grant, bounty, and retro systems are valuable for larger units of work but have a reasonably high barrier to entry that limits their use.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Reduce Friction - Individuals in the community can reward value without needing to spend time writing up grants or retro proposals.
  • Personal Recognition - Smaller units of value can be recognized and rewarded without adding a large organizational cost.
  • Extension of Trust - The pDAO trusts discord community participants to allocate the reward pool effectively.

Semi-Competitive Debates

When there are relevant governance decisions to be made, organize an informal debate on the issues at hand. Debates should be recorded and summarized such that the value generated persists beyond those present.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Power - Power-motivated individuals tend to enjoy debate and the opportunity to demonstrate their ability.
  • Activity - Semi-regular debates help contribute to the activity going on at the Rocket Pool DAOs.
  • Reduce Friction - For some individuals, tuning in to a recorded debate may be a lower-friction way to engage with the issues of governance.

Regular and Predictable Voting Periods

Adopt regular and predictable voting periods (one ‘fast’ and one ‘slow’). All votes are fit into one of these periods (with the exception of emergency response.)

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Reduces Friction - Reduces effort required for node operators to govern. They can just check the voting portal once a week and know they aren’t missing anything.
  • Expectations - Allows the DAO to set and meet expectations around governance.
  • Structured Governance - Creating governance structures reduces uncertainty which can increase participation.
  • Competence - Allows the DAO to show competence through the adoption of a structure that meets governance requirements.

Narrative Governance Activity / History

Create a serial, fictionalized narrative summary of the governance activity at Rocket Pool. To encourage consistent engagement with the content, you need something that is intrinsically fun, while also being informative.

Connection to Abstract Considerations

  • Public Recognition - Can highlight the actions of individuals or small groups in a fun way.
  • Competence - Allows DAO to maintain a written record (even if informal and allegorical) of activity.
  • Barrier to Exit - No other DAOs do this and it could compete favorably with non-DAO activities.


Discussion Points

Hopefully we can get some amount of discussion going on these recommendations. Here are some prompts:

  • Are there any recommendations you see as especially valuable?
  • Are there any recommendations you don’t believe are worth pursuing?
  • Some recommendations involve shifting the community culture to a certain end. Is this possible? Desireable?
  • Many recommendations add complexity to the Rocket Pool DAOs, how can we make sure the benefit is worth the cost in complexity?
  • How much desire exists in the community for improvements to be made? Is anyone happy with the status-quo?
  • Are there other areas that should get focus prior to governance and DAO engagement? (Try not to go too off-topic here, please.)
  • Does anyone have strong feelings (pro or con) on any of the abstract considerations?

Specific Feedback

  • I’d love to get input from the GMC members on the bounty recommendations.
  • I’d love to get feedback from the development team on the trust-extension theme.
  • I’d love to hear from anyone that is excited enough about any of these items to want to work on them.

Next Steps

If anyone wants to work on any of these feel free to do so. We’ll look to get some of these implemented ourselves as well, but we’re very happy to hand them off if anyone is passionate about any of them. A number of the higher ranked ones are quite low-effort so we’ll start with those.

For some of the larger recommendations we may submit bounties for their completion. This ties in a bit to the proposed bounty changes, which I’m looking forward to working on, so I may work on some bounty definitions adjacent to that work.

Thanks for reading everyone!


Imma skip most of the polisci/psych stuff, but I will touch on one thing: I don’t think it’s necessarily the case that a wider funnel gets us many more contributors. Incredibly, I’d guess we have a couple hundred people at the “Advocacy” stage where RP is meaningful to them and they will bring it up to others (at least opportunistically). I think we have a chasm going from “like RP a lot” and “put personal time/energy into moving RP forward”, and I think effort might be more efficient on bridging the chasm rather than getting more people into the funnel to see if we get a few more that can do the leap over the chasm.

Will hit your items in your Cost-benefit order:

Response to all items
  • Encourage and Reward Mentorship
    • Honestly… mentoring an interested person is incredibly rewarding in and of itself. I don’t think there’s RP tasks I like more than helping someone else write a proposal, work on forum posts, etc. I get to lighten the load on the current few folks working hard. I get to teach. I get pride and a sense of accomplishment by proxy. (I’ll note this applies to “peer” relationships as much as “mentor-mentee”)
    • I think we’re quite good at being available as a community. I know I never had trouble getting my questions answered when spinning up. This does imply a modest amount of proactively reaching out, but… folks will need much more self-starting in other stages anyhow, so I don’t see this as a bottleneck.
  • Governance Onboarding Experience
    • I’m a little unclear what stage this is meant to address. Voting? Writing an RPIP?
  • LFG Support
    • What’s the purpose? Is this for bounties? We definitely have “who wants to work with me on X” happen (though response is hit or miss). Is this for RPIP writing etc? It’s tough to get attention there.
    • What’s this look like concretely, and how is it significantly different than asking for ppl in #trading or #governance and making a thread?
  • Vote stickers
    • This is purely awesome. If we can figure out a way to do this in discord, that sounds great.
  • Bounty Sytem
    • Bounty board: I think this would help. I point people to RPIP-29 regularly, and that’s great, but it requires bouncing around to forum etc to find things.
    • Scale up via incentives: currently we have 3 RPL for bounty proposers that hit the first 2 bullets. This is a nice thank you, but I don’t think it steers behavior a huge amount. Increasing rewards over time is interesting, but has weird perverse incentives when competition is thin.
    • Marketing: We don’t really do much marketing. It could get some play on RF or twitter spaces I guess?
  • Community-Led Documentation Revamp
  • Decentralise powers over communications venues
    • I think this is important and an easy win
    • Discord and forum miniadmins?
    • For RPIP editors specifically, I’ll note that the difficulty has been getting people to want the role more than getting the role provided
  • Informal voice chat
    • We do have chit chat, and it has gotten some ad hoc usage. Worth a shot to try to get socialization? Would this compete with twitter spaces? Someone that does synchronous stuff should opine :stuck_out_tongue:
  • Hall of fame
    • We have the poaps, so seems quite doable
  • Objective setting
    • We did a little of this for one roadmap discussion. I think it’s a decent initial brainstorm. I think we’re not great at converging and planning clearly from there.
  • Low Friction Quantitative Recognition System
  • Semi-Competitive Debates
    • I honestly hate this :P. Well thought out responses, modeling, etc is my preference; I think that’s super hard to do fast. This sounds like prioritizing “sounding right” or “assertion”.
    • As an example, I can bring up the RPL staking research thread. There we saw opinions change over weeks. We saw models get refined over weeks. We saw models get discarded because they had issues. We saw models get discarded because they were too hard to explain. Etc.
    • I also worry about polarizing, which debates tend to feed effectively.
  • Regular and Predictable Voting Periods
    • “They can just check the voting portal once a week and know they aren’t missing anything.”
      • Per RPIP-4, the fastest allowed voting period is 7 days, with 14 days being recommended (and I believe the only thing we’ve used). I think checking weekly should do the trick plenty well.
    • Needing to delay votes we think are important to line up with a period seems an unneeded annoyance (to proposers and authors and editors) and a possible danger (as folks try to “get it in for this round”)
  • Narrative Governance Activity / History
    • Weird… I’m here for it.


  • Love: Vote stickers, Bounty board, Decentralise powers over communications venues
  • Lean positive: Bounty incentives, Hall of fame, Low Friction Quantitative Recognition System, Narrative Governance Activity / History
  • Shrug: Encourage and Reward Mentorship, Bounty marketing, Informal voice chat, Objective setting
  • Lean negative: Regular and Predictable Voting Periods, Community-Led Documentation Revamp
  • Pls no: Semi-Competitive Debates
  • Need more info: Governance Onboarding Experience, LFG Support
1 Like

Thanks @Valdorff, appreciate the feedback as always. To answer your questions, and generally respond:

I would agree there is a lot of intrinsic value here for a lot of people. I think the main benefits to explicitly incentivising it are:

  • Overcoming the ‘first time’ hump for individuals that have not been in a mentorship role before.
  • More explicitly recognising the value mentors are providing. The intrinsic reward is nice. It’s also nice if what you’re doing is seen as valuable by your peers.
  • Encouraging a proactive approach: It’s very easy to help someone that asks for it. Harder to recognize when someone is trying to get involved, and is too intimidated to explicitly ask for help.

Small financial incentives in this case are more of a signal of: “As a DAO we recognize and value this.” versus meant to be a primary source of income for anyone.

Voting and delegation. At the most basic level, the instructions on how to vote and delegate should be wrapped up in the official onboarding guides on the official documentation portal. At a more complex level, you can introduce some sort of interactive process to help NO’s select a delegate.

Not significantly different in practice. Its significantly different in the signal it provides to the community: Groups are encouraged. If you feel unable to contribute to something meaningful due to lack of skills, we invite you to find others, etc.

Purpose is for anything really. I’ve noticed that lots of people are doing lots of individual things. Relatively rare to see people team up to do things.

I’m aware of the bounty. The bounty requires the teams sign-off. Having the bounty is different to having the team actively push an initiative, trust the community to do a good job, etc. There is a lack of coordination, but also a lack of ‘permission’ and ‘control’ for want of better terms. The bounties cover general fixing of out of date information, and expanding FAQs, it does not cover significantly reworking the documentation.

To illustrate, what if a group of community members work on it, and decide that a different structure would better achieve the results everyone wants? There’s no bounty for modifying the structure. The bounty is narrow, contributions are only explicitly welcomed within constraints. That is less effective at ‘DAO building’ than: “We’re proposing some goals for you as a DAO, we trust you with creative control, go make the docs better.”

I’d missed the bounty you linked there. Thanks, will keep it in mind if we work on that.

Fair enough. Some points of clarification.

  • The debates should be more performative than competitive. Both parties should prepare in advance. Debate should have some basic structure, timed points and counterpoints, etc. This is a thing in the U.S right? Debate clubs, and such? Something vaguely analogous to that.
  • Live debates should happen once the discussion and proposal has been finalized. Ideally, the participants are just re-stating things that engaged people already know. The goal being that they are providing an entertaining summary for less-engaged participants.
  • On polarization, yeah, that’s a risk.

I suspect I did a bad job of explaining this one. Even so, its fairly low down the list for a reason. It may just not be a great fit for this community, or for DAOs in general.

Fair points, the reasoning I used there is just wrong. The benefit is more along the lines of ‘can check at the same time knowing a vote will be at the same point.’ Some want to vote early, some want to bandwagon at the end, etc.

Honestly, I don’t think think the benefits are very pronounced at this stage, though, and it does introduce annoying delays. It may become more valuable if the governance workload starts to increase.

Yeah… I’m going to have to write some as a trial, and its gonna stress me out a lot.

Cool. Added a please steal as you wish license to Val's guide to RP voting - Google Docs

1 Like