[RFC] RSR Health: Request For Comments

Governance & Research
63

Background on how I see these things:

The primary factor that will ultimately determine success or failure for Reserve and RSR holders is product-market fit for Reserve DTFs. The underlying economic engine is fueled by fees that Reserve DTF holders pay. So of course we should not be spending RSR to keep the party going as the project matures over time — RSR holders should *receive* their portion of the value captured, not have to pay any value out. That said, RSR has been and continues to be the lighter fluid we need to start and grow the fire.

The essential nature of product-market fit, which determines the fees we will ultimately earn or fail to earn, is the lens I view this all through. Which course of action will maximize the chances we grow to the size of Aave and beyond? Whatever that is, let’s do that.

RSR health is a very important piece of the puzzle.

The price of RSR determines our budget to get things off the ground until fees grow large enough. It also determines the personal financial outcome for many of us, myself included, and the better we all do, the more we want to participate and invest our efforts in the project.

What determines the price of RSR? Supply and demand. Portions of this discussion focus on supply and other portions focus on demand. On the supply side, we have the concerns about emissions. On the demand side, we have the concerns about metrics and other potential turnoffs that may prevent people out there from joining us in holding RSR. I take both seriously, and at the moment I’m especially concerned with anything that makes people who truly believe in the purpose and promise of the Reserve project nevertheless feel uncomfortable holding RSR.

Another aspect of RSR health apart from price is ownership, empowerment, and contributions by RSR holders to RTokens and the broader project. The governance power RSR affords is the way we share power in steering RTokens, and could be how we share power in steering the project. We clearly have work to do to get governance right; at best I’d say it’s vastly incomplete, and a cynic could be forgiven for saying it’s broken.

How/when to go about this discussion:

As Thomas mentioned, ABC is close to going public with an initiative they’ve been working hard on for quite some time. This initiative is not aimed at addressing RSR token dynamics, it’s aimed at getting distribution and growth for index DTFs, which has been ABC’s priority all year.

I think it’s going to be more productive to work through this discussion with that initiative visible in public, since you’ll be able to talk about (with praise or critique) the fruits of their labor in a way you can’t right now without knowing what they’ve been up to. We’ll also be able to talk about the challenges with lack of transparency from a perspective of being more on the same page about what they’ve been up to.

Unless something goes off track, they are days away from that going public, so I’ll hold off on getting into the details of this discussion until then.

In the meantime, I have two factual corrections to offer, and a question I would like more input on:

Factual corrections:

  1. It’s been stated in this thread that there’s an existing unlocked RSR treasury of 20b tokens. That’s not true. That’s the number of tokens that have unlocked in the treasury category since October 2020, five years ago. A good portion of those tokens have been used along the way to get us to where we are today. If we decide to go into full transparency mode, we can publish the exact numbers along with all other relevant numbers. (Going into full transparency mode would bring about a bunch of new issues that we don’t have today, it wouldn’t be all sunshine and rainbows, but I’m very open to the idea. Let’s talk about that along with all these other proposals starting in a few days.)
  2. James doesn’t think burning 30b locked RSR would lead to a price increase. For everyone here who is excited about the burn because of the idea that it would lead to a near-term price increase, I just think it’s important that you understand that James doesn’t think that’s what would happen.

Question for you guys:

@Smeddy said something that was pretty moving for me:

It would be helpful for me to get a complete list of the asterisks and caveats you feel you need to include. I get that this thread is substantially about addressing those and they have been alluded to, but I specifically want to know what you guys talk about with friends who ask you about Reserve to make sure I fully understand what the perceived issues are and can work to address them all comprehensively.

One final thought for now:

In reflecting on all this, I went back and re-read the blog post we published about the RSR emissions curve in August 2024. It explains the thinking that went into that plan in detail. If you want to be one of the 10-20 most engaged contributors on all of this, I recommend re-reading that post so you can have that context in mind as we discuss.

8 Likes
64

Thank you Nevin for this thoughtful and fact-based response. We’re wide open to support the Reserve ecosystem with research, analytics and insights from our years serving many top DAOs on their governance journey.

For us as governance facilitators, the “lowest hanging fruit” is to get closer to a cross DTF governance of some kind. I put lowest into quotes because it’s actually a massive feat of collaboration, since every DTF would need to give up some yield and control to others.

At the moment it is very hard for DTF DAOs to fund meaningful initiatives and grants because their earnings aren’t big enough, or because any outflow means less staking yield to $RSR stakers, when staking is the primary demand driver for RSR.

Afaik, only eUSD has taken up the initiative and is sharing revenue with Sawyer to be an eUSD champion. Ham has contributed immensely to governance and is doing so on purely intrinsic motivations.

A cross DTF fund could help finance marketing campaigns, incentivize ambassadors or give grants to builders to grow the whole pie. We already have some really good thinking on the subject here in this thread.

We’re happy to move this further, if there’s buyin from major stakeholders and interest to make that happen.

Another, broader initiative could be a common gauge system of ve-locking RSR and voting on gauges to fund initiatives, and/or get yield from DTF, but with a common, easy interface, such as can be seen in Curve Finance, Aerodrome and Velodrome.

This would require substantial development as well.

I personally really cherish the newfound sense of urgency and the passion to improve governance. Please consider me and all of StableLab at your service when you need us.

9 Likes
65

“ but I specifically want to know what you guys talk about with friends who ask you about Reserve to make
sure I fully understand what the perceived issues are
and can work to address them all comprehensively.”

Me: yo bro check out Reserve Protocol

Friend: opens CoinMarketCap

Friend: sees 100B supply, weekly unlocks, price flatlined

Me: so what you think?

Friend: bro… am I a joke to you?

4 Likes
66

“but I specifically want to know what you guys talk about with friends who ask you about Reserve to make sure I fully understand what the perceived issues are and can work to address them all comprehensively.”

Before I even get to explaining DTFs, collateral diversity, or the long-term vision, the optics alone tend to kill the curiosity — at least in my experience. When I show people Reserve, the first thing they see isn’t the innovation or the economics; it’s the charts: a 100 billion total supply, a circulating amount already over half of that, and a price that’s been flat for ages.

And yeah — price absolutely attracts interest. Movement makes people curious; stagnation does the opposite. Most people don’t want to dig deeper when the first impression already looks lifeless.

To be clear, that’s not how I see Reserve — I actually believe in the long-term vision and what’s being built. But that’s the reality of how most people react when they first come across it. Perception shuts the door before substance even gets a chance to walk in.

If that first impression can be flipped — through clearer communication, visible progress, and more consistent engagement — the rest of the story would have a much easier time being heard.

7 Likes
67

Re:

A delay in finalizing puts us likely over a week away now, for anyone who’s tracking. As Thomas said, if it drags on too long we’ll just have this discussion without waiting. Deals like this often have last-min delays which is one reason they aren’t usually referred to in advance, but given the relevance to this discussion it seemed worth mentioning.

Thanks @glock and @DeezNuts for your input. I invite others to share what their conversations have been like as well.

1 Like
68

Hello, I’ll post a contribution from the opposite side here, from someone who doesn’t understand the financial world at your level, but is apparently supposed to be your customer. Honestly, I don’t know what Nevin and the others tell their friends about RSR, but I know what I tell my friends. Just the truth! And that is, when about five years ago, a big inflation broke out in my country, I wanted to protect my savings that I had set aside for my children when they want to become independent. I wanted to invest in BTC, but unfortunately I came across the Reserve project and I liked that they want to fight inflation, so I put my money into Reserve (I had no idea about DCA at the time and fully believed in the mission of this project). I didn’t need to make money, just preserve the value of my money. Now my children are no longer 11 and 13 years old, but 16 and 18, and with the investment I’m 80% worse off than if I had done absolutely nothing. In the case of investing in BTC, I would be +560% at this point. I just tell my friends this, and let them decide for themselves where to put their money if they want to invest in crypto.

1 Like
69

Hi @IDBeSo, I’m really sorry to hear that. Looking back, one of my biggest errors of the project was letting the circulating supply stay too small for too long, which (in my opinion) contributed to RSR prices going too high early on, likely during the time you bought. Once tokens did finally enter circulation, that unlocked supply in the hands of many holders likely had a downward impact on price in following years. I take responsibility for this error, so I share in the blame for your financial outcome.

I will not feel resolved on this issue until RSR surpasses its prior ATH with appropriate protocol fees backing it, so that no further dip would be rational.

Even then, many who bought high will have sold low and will never recoup that value, which is something we can’t undo, and which I will always feel uneasy about. If I could control the RSR price, I’d want it to slowly and steadily climb, in line with the actual value and prospects of the project, which I hope will continually build over time until we are an unqualified success.

I hope I can make it up to you, or if you’ve already moved on, I hope your investments will preserve and grow your purchasing power and do well for you and your children.

6 Likes
70

You had the opportunity to fix this during the locked supply decision and failed again.

1 Like
71

I disagree on this point. While I believe supply changes were an issue earlier on, I think in the past year supply changes are not the problem. I know many don’t see it that way; we’ll discuss this in more detail soon.

1 Like
72

Long term holder here. Sentiment about the project is the worst I’ve ever seen while the protocol is supposedly doing great. Could be many reasons for that. Probably people are over invested and rek’d beyond infinity. Price in the gutter for years with the occasionally small pump only to get dumped on immediately by who knows who. Eusd flat for years while ugly cash is supposedly seeing some PMF.

Everything is going great except for the rsr holder. As a long term holder I find it hard to keep funding the project while supply keeps going up and price going down. No sane person would advise their friends to invest in the project. I will wait to see what’s in store for the next couple of months to see how the team adresses all the concerns about the project regarding supply, transparency and communication but selling at a reasonable loss isn’t out of the question anymore. I think many holders feel the same way.

3 Likes
73

There are literally nearly 90%+ community contributors in this thread disagreeing with you. So please acknowledge that.

1 Like
74

Thanks @nevin.freeman, that context helps, and I agree it’ll be easier to dive deeper in this once the ABC initiative is public. I’m looking forward to seeing it and discussing it with full visibility.

That said, I want to flag a concern about how this is framed. If Reserve’s edge is seen only as DTF distribution, it makes RSR look like just a funding token instead of the coordination layer that helps DTFs launch quickly, safely, and at low cost while staying neutral and trusted.

It also gives the impression that ABC Labs will handle everything, which neuters the community and when markets turn, that kind of setup compounds in the wrong direction for Reserve’s mission and morale.

On the “asterisks and caveats” question, I’ve outlined some of the concerns mostly around legibility, transparency, ownership and participation pathways.

Instead of me arguing whether RSR Health is the differentiating edge, it would help to hear from you and ABC what you think will bring people along. You’ve said the edge is DTF distribution, which sounds interesting, but what’s still unclear is how Reserve will stand out and why it’s best positioned to win that race. What can we tell our friends, if it’s not RSR?

The stakes feel high, with several players building their own versions of Indexes/DTF distribution, including Alvara, Index.fun, Index Coop, SoSoValue, dHedge, Origin, Enzyme, Crypto.com Baskets, and Kraken Bundles. If DTFs become a big thing, we should expect even more competition, each with its own edge.

The community wants to understand where to focus its energy to help make that edge real. Right now, there’s quiet resistance because people hear the headline but don’t yet own the “why” or see how their efforts fit in.

It’s worth noting there’s a bit of a chicken-and-egg dynamic in the Reserve ecosystem. The core teams might feel the community hasn’t contributed much, while the community feels shut out and discouraged. I think this can be fixed. Many of us still care deeply and want to help, we just need the right structure to make that possible.

I’m hopeful we can all start pulling in the same direction and compound progress more effectively. I also hope more people share their asterisks and caveats openly so you can get a fuller picture of the challenges we’re all navigating.

10 Likes
75

“but I specifically want to know what you guys talk about with friends who ask you about Reserve to make sure I fully understand what the perceived issues are and can work to address them all comprehensively.”

  1. Somehow despite the clear connections with the initial investors, there is some skepticism over whether they actually are still around and supporting the project. And the extent to which they are also tends to be a factor.
  2. The fact that ath happened some time ago makes it look like there’s not much happening these days because the assumption is that it would be represented in the chart. Placed alongside a lot of the shiny new toys that explode onto the scene ans shift focus regularly takes attention away.
  3. The 100b supply is an instant ick factor for many. Follow this up with the monthly unlocks and this tends to be part of the reason for the half baked argument that "‘Muh, team is dumping on everyone’, it’s a scam”.
1 Like
76

Hi all,

Long-time X poster here and multi-year backer (investor, supporter - whatever you want to call it). Finally joined this forum to take part in a discussion that feels both dear and necessary.

Markets often misprice assets that are transitioning from narrative to infrastructure. RSR sits right in that gap - overbuilt, undervalued and a little out of focus. (Reserve Protocol, RSR, DTF, ABC, RTokens - the story feels scattered, which makes it hard to explain when you’re simply trying to talk about RSR.)

Either the market’s right, or the next move — maybe that long-awaited ABC announcement — will be violent.

At this point, Nevin feels like the Woz where Brad Garlinghouse is the Jobs.
The tech is visionary, but the message needs clarity and focus.

Personally, I think it’s time to silence the “Reserve is dumping on us” crowd once and for all with transparent emissions that build confidence (and help some price recovery), cleaner storytelling, and visible real-world traction. Small-cap optics don’t match base-layer architecture forever.

I’m not here for a quick win or short-term price action. I’m here because I believe in the Reserve team, the protocol and the mission. I’m rooting for some action that will bring the clarity, focus and great future this project and team deserves.

Cheers,
CJ

:blue_heart:

9 Likes
77

Hi Nevin - fully understood, and thanks for the update. In my previous post I outlined some governance structures and potential ways forward, but like you said, it makes sense to wait for ABC Labs’ announcement before going further. Better to assess token mechanics once the full distribution context is visible.

For now, I’ll focus specifically on the asterisks and caveats you asked about - the ones we end up giving people when we talk about RSR. Over the years, I’ve had this conversation many times with two very different groups: unsophisticated investors (friends, acquaintances, meme-coin crowd) and sophisticated investors (long-standing contacts in high-end family office/UHNW circles across Europe and the Middle East). The conversations break down fast in both cases - just for very different reasons.

1. Unsophisticated Investors (surface-level, buddies, meme-coin crowd)

They don’t care about the seed investors, the long-term architecture, or the monetary vision. They care about the chart. And with a multi-year flatline, their reaction is instant:

“Looks like every other dead crypto. Why are you still holding this?”

The story goes from “global monetary infrastructure” to “garage project with a dream” in seconds. And when the same people are outperforming us by buying meme coins based on jokes and tickers, they start to see RSR holders as the unsophisticated ones - holding a complex narrative with no price validation. For this group, the optics shut the conversation down immediately. There is no recovery from the first impression.

2. Sophisticated Investors (Long-standing personal contacts in family office/UHNW circles)

These are principals, dynastic families, and sovereign-adjacent wealth holders I’ve known personally for years - people who ask for input because of long-term trust, not because I’m pitching them. This is intergenerational capital that thinks in decades, not cycles. They don’t trade narratives; they commit to systems they believe can endure. If Reserve’s optics were cleaner, this is the exact category of patient, reputationally strong capital that would align naturally with the long-term vision.

To add context: They also behave very differently from VC, PE, or fund-driven capital. Those vehicles have exit windows, LP pressure, and rotation mandates. These families don’t. They can hold positions for ten or twenty years, if the structure is credible. They behave more like long-term monetary stewards than opportunistic allocators, which is fundamentally aligned and relevant to what Reserve ultimately aims to become.

But their pattern-recognition filters are also extremely refined. If a narrative doesn’t click instantly - cleanly, without caveats - they move on. And after enough conversations that ended with the same question (“How’s that Venezuela project doing now?” - always another 50% down), I eventually stopped bringing Reserve up at all. Not because the vision is wrong, but because the optics make the conversation impossible before the fundamentals even enter the room.

A. The Supply + Trust Issue

The moment they see the supply and unlock mechanics, the response is always:

“So this ultimately requires trusting a third party?”

I can talk about the team’s integrity, the emissions article, the necessity of runway, the deterministic unlock curves - but none of that overcomes the fact that in crypto everyone says their team won’t misuse supply. Trust-based tokenomics are a non-starter for this tier. In a space full of mercenary capital and reflexive distrust, the moment the story begins with “you have to trust the team,” the conversation ends. Even if it’s not the intention, the optics resemble perpetual-funding models they avoid outright.

B. The Bitcoin Emission Analogy

If they get past the supply (most don’t), the next sticking point is:

“Why are we comparing this to Bitcoin when this isn’t Bitcoin?”

Bitcoin’s curve is credible because it is mined, decentralized, irreversible, and mathematically enforced. A discretionary “Bitcoin-style” curve without Bitcoin’s trustlessness sets off immediate skepticism.

3. The Narrative Dislocation (shared between both groups)

Even when they respect the ambition, the same issues derail the conversation every time:

  • the flat chart

  • the supply/unlock optics

  • shifting narratives (Arbitrage-based stablecoin → RToken suite → DTFs)

  • lack of transparency around treasury usage

  • and the recurring “How’s that Venezuela thing doing?” question, always landing worse than before

Psychologically, people go from:

“You early guys might be onto something”

to

“This looks like a small group defending the wrong trade.”

Meanwhile, simple meme coins are multiplying, which reinforces their skepticism and makes the pitch harder every time.

This is the distilled reality behind the caveats we end up giving - across both the everyday crowd and the sophisticated investor base. And I think that’s the root of why the community is pushing for a structural reset: not to suffocate the project, but to fix the optics that shut these conversations down before we even get a chance to explain the fundamentals.

Happy to expand further or provide more examples if helpful.

10 Likes
78

I joined Reserve in early 2020 drawn in by the whitepaper’s promise of a decentralized stablecoin for the unbanked. I’ve celebrated the wins of RTokens launching, DTFs going live, eUSD proving its real-world value early on. I’ve also endured the frustrations, years of price stagnation, governance silence, and the continued unease over a 100 billion supply that warps perception even if most of these tokens sit idle.

This RFC cuts through the noise by pointing at reality from outside the Reserve echo chamber. Low governance turnout, centralized treasury control, emissions on a Bitcoin-like curve but without the transparency, and an FDV that makes RSR appear overvalued.

Stepping back has only sharpened what matters:

Where RSR Stands Today

• Protocol vs. token disconnect: RTokens/DTFs are secure, composable, and seeing early adoption. Yet value mostly flows off-chain or into company wallets, without much intent on rewarding RSR holders who have been made to feel like bag holders serving to fund ongoing initiatives without any real clarity.

• Governance is broken: Fewer than five voters on major proposals isn’t a glitch it’s a clear signal that community members feel that their RSR offers no real voice, so people stay away. When an organization can conspire to allocate huge amounts of voting power, we interpret that as “We know what we’re doing just be grateful you’re along for the ride” even though the ride has bled most holders of both purchasing power and energy.

• Supply overhang hurts perception: Billions in unlocked tokens may not be moving, but they loom large. Markets price fear and uncertainty. There is a lot of both with Reserve imo.

• Transparency is missing: We see the emission curve, but not where treasury funds go. This undermines trust.

Thoughts from the Sidelines

A couple of short suggestions:

• Launch an “RSR 2.0” summary: One clear, emission schedule, governance rights, treasury rules, and attainable goals. People need something concrete to measure progress against. Reserve’s past goals have been vague at best. The community is full of passionate supporters ready to help, but without direction, we’re left rehashing outdated info. Perception needs a reset. Why choose RSR over a million other tokens? That answer has drifted too far and it’s time to bring it back.

• Track the metric that matters most: Average unique voters per DTF proposal. I’ve witnessed this topic talked about endlessly in the Lodge/Twitter and privately between members. Centralized allocations to a handful of people have stripped voting power from everyone else. That’s the opposite of what Reserve stands for. Let’s measure progress here above all.

Reserve was built to empower, not concentrate control. The tech works. The mission endures. Now the token needs to finally live up to both.

Sincerely,

Flamingo Mafia

7 Likes
79

Have always thought that RSR in a project that was needed not just for wealth growth , but as stated by Reserve it self “ for all humanity”. One aspect of any project it solves a problem . RSR is that kind of project and I thank the team for really developing a protocol that hits on a lot of pain points , and it has helps resolve some of the problems with how money can be for the good not just the privileged.

Now about the supply I have held RSR for about 6 or 7 years now. When I hear someone say that you have to give the project time to grow and that you as an investor should just give it time. That is the absolute worst take on investing I’ve ever heard and it shows a lack of understanding of what you’re doing with your money. So stop with the let’s make the investor feel like he has an obligation to hold forever, the idea is to make money and spread the projects main use to others .

So Reserve has put out products out that are useful and can be used by all, 100% have held because of these reasons . But, yes here is the but , the supply and constant release is like hitting a brick wall every time the price starts to increase . Eventually as someone who has held for so long doesn’t question the project , but questions if it can survive with the constant selling pressure . If you know there are more shares coming then why not just wait . It’s a constant downward pressure that eventually kills the project off or sends it spiraling out of control. Because lack of confidence that the price will ever increase . Just constant selling because eventually you run out of people to sell to!

I support the proposal , with the idea of we can launch the price forward we can bring in more investors, along with more developers and ideas of use cases. Why is that one word “ confidence “ mean so much because as any project you have to have new investors and new fresh ideas they have to have confidence there money will grow . We also cannot forget those who have invested early an often are going to eventually be rewarded because they will promote the Reserve Eco system for the team and it leads to a confidence that the project will survive. Word of mouth and people telling Reserves mission will promote itself. But with the price being sub penny prices what confidence does that inspire?

4 Likes
80

Let me be direct, because we’re six years in and at this stage anything else is delusion.

The whole “no hype, let the fundamentals speak for itself” approach sounds noble.

Plenty of projects have tried it.

Which ones?

You’ve never heard of them - and never will.

And that’s exactly the point.

It’s a death sentence.

Crypto is not a sector where quiet excellence wins. It’s a sector that runs on attention, narratives, and momentum - even for the best, most legitimate projects.

-Satoshi didn’t disappear immediately - he actively promoted Bitcoin on mailing lists, forums, and direct correspondence with cryptographers.

-Vitalik toured conferences, wrote endlessly, pitched the Ethereum whitepaper to anyone who would listen.

-Solana, Polygon, Link, AVAX, Cosmos - every major project amplified their progress publicly, early, and consistently.

The difference is simple: they marketed, hyped AND delivered. That combination is what turned them into leaders. Not because they hid in a cave waiting to be discovered. They relied on presence.

Meanwhile, we’ve basically taken a monastic vow of silence.

“It’s up to the community to push the narrative.” With what, exactly?

-No marketing until very recently

-No clear narrative

-No consistent communication

-And a chart so depressing we all open it on 20% brightness to avoid public embarrassment

We aren’t a stealth project anymore. We’re a forgotten one. Gone from the conversation entirely.

We didn’t even land in the “responsible, serious, thoughtful” category. We landed in:

“Reserve? Didn’t that end already?”

That’s our brand right now.

The caution made sense at first - the overcorrection didn’t. For years, the tone from the team was:

-avoid speculation

-avoid hype

-avoid noise

-avoid drawing too much attention

-avoid going too big too soon

The intention was good. The outcome was catastrophic.

Crypto moves too fast. The graveyard is filled with thousands of “next big techs” that died quietly in the dark.

Ideas are great - but validation, hype, and price action are what separate the top projects from the dead ones.

And here’s the tragic part:

we actually have impressive access to high-level players - some of the best in the industry. Most people don’t even believe it when I explain it.

Yet our name is barely known outside of a tiny circle of dedicated holders and a handful of Twitter accounts pushing the $RSR ticker daily. And massive respect to them - they’ve been doing the job the team hasn’t. But even they look exhausted.

The entire community is holding its breath for this next announcement because we genuinely have nothing left to point to:

-No narrative

-No momentum

-No visibility

And a chart that belongs as a centerpiece in the museum of financial disasters

You cannot build momentum around a project that refuses to step into the light.

We’ve built fundamentals. We’ve pivoted. We’ve learned. But from a market perspective - optics, narrative, reputation, price performance, and relevance…

we are in the mud.

And honestly, nothing sums it all up better than the infamous Twitter story of that guy who wore a Reserve T-shirt to a bar. Someone approached him and asked what the project was about, pulled up our chart, burst out laughing, and our heroic Ranger had to walk out in shame before he ever got to talk about token folios.

That’s where we all are right now.

Bottom line: The strategy needs to change and fast.

The fact that we’re all sitting here basically begging for a 30 BILLION burn just to bring back a heartbeat tells you everything you need to know.

12 Likes
82

Thanks everyone for sharing your asterisks and caveats, good for us to get on the same page about those.

A couple of other projects have been named as inspirations for this discussion (Hyperliquid and FRAX) and I wanted to add Uniswap to that list of projects contemplating adjustments. Their proposal, published yesterday, is worth studying as well as we think about all this. Take a look at this letter of intent for how the DAO and the Labs co would relate.

I strongly believe that what’s right for one project is not going to 100% map onto another project so you won’t see me propose directly copying anyone wholesale, but I’m all for recognizing good ideas and analyzing whether they would fit well for Reserve.

1 Like