Update curriculum source files to current versions

content/curriculum/PS Guides/0-kickoff-onboarding.md

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 # 0: Kickoff & Onboarding
-
 ## Pre-session
 
 - Review Session 0 agenda and your intro talking points
@@ -11,7 +10,7 @@ This is the full cohort's orientation to the program. Participants do introducti
 
 
 :::info
-A theme we want to emphasize (based on feedback from Cohort 5) is: "friction is part of the work." It's to be expected, and is not something to fear or avoid. 
+A theme we want to emphasize (based on feedback from Cohort 5) is: **"friction is part of the work."** It's to be expected, and is not something to fear or avoid. 
 
 :::
 
@@ -19,14 +18,14 @@ A theme we want to emphasize (based on feedback from Cohort 5) is: "friction is
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
 - You're introduced and matched with your studio
-- Observe your studio during introductions - who talks, who doesn't, what pain points do they talk about?
-- Participate in community agreements drafting - you are ***part of the community!***
+- Observe your studio during introductions – who talks, who doesn't, what pain points do they talk about?
+- Participate in community agreements drafting – you are ***part of the community!***
 
 
 ### **👆Your role after session**
 
 - Connect and chat with your studio in their Slack channel(s)
-- Make sure they understand the Power Flower homework (especially that it is a private, individual reflection, and no one else will see it)
+- Make sure they understand the Power Flower homework (especially that it is a private, individual reflection, and no one else will see it unless they want to share)
 - Note any first impressions to share at the PS check-in
 
 

content/curriculum/PS Guides/1-coop-principles-power.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 In this session, we cover cooperative history and lineages, crediting Global South, Indigenous, Black, women's traditions, not just Rochdale. We also review the 7 ICA Principles.
 
-The theme is moving from principles to personal values.
+The theme is *moving from principles to personal values*.
 
 
 :::tip
@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ The theme is moving from principles to personal values.
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
-- Observe small group activity (cooperative lineage sharing) - note whose stories are shared
-- Listen for how studios talk about values - vague or specific?
+- Observe small group activity (cooperative lineage sharing) – note whose stories are shared
+- Listen for how studios talk about values – vague or specific?
 
 
 ## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Values Mapping**
@@ -38,16 +38,16 @@ The theme is moving from principles to personal values.
 
 #### **Check-in (5 min)**
 
-Individual sharing (15-20 min) - Each person shares 3-5 values from their individual reflection.
+Individual sharing (15-20 min) – Each person shares 3-5 values from their individual reflection.
 
 Prompts:
 
 - "What values came up when you did the journaling?"
 - "You don't need to explain or justify."
 
-As they share: each person adds values to the Miro board (stickies in their colour/section). No discussion - just capture.
+As they share: each person adds values to the Miro board (stickies in their colour/section). No discussion – just capture.
 
-Watch for: someone dominating or going first every time; someone staying quiet - invite them in gently; values that sound the same but might mean different things to different people.
+Watch for: Someone dominating or going first every time; someone staying quiet – invite them in gently; values that sound the same but might mean different things to different people.
 
 
 #### **Noticing patterns (10-15 min)**
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ Prompts:
 - "Are there values that seem similar but might mean different things to different people?"
 
 
-> Example to offer: "Transparency" - does it mean open documents? Open conversations? Both? Neither? What exactly is meant?
+> Example to offer: "Transparency" – does it mean open documents? Open conversations? Both? Neither? What exactly is meant?
 
 
 **Connecting to the 7 Principles (10 min)**
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ Look at the ICA principles together.
 
 - "Do you see connections between your values and these principles?"
 - "Draw lines or group things if it helps."
-    - This can be loose - don't let them fixate on making a beautiful diagram. The point is seeing that their values connect to a larger cooperative tradition.
+    – This can be loose – don't let them fixate on making a beautiful diagram. The point is seeing that their values connect to a larger cooperative tradition.
 
 
 #### **To bring back to Session 2 (5 min)**
@@ -81,8 +81,7 @@ Look at the ICA principles together.
 **Prompts**:
 
 - "What's one thing you learned about where your team aligns or diverges?"
-- * *You'll share this in Session 2 - doesn't need to be polished.*
-    - Have someone write it down or capture it on the board.
+	- You'll share this in Session 2 – doesn't need to be polished. Have someone write it down or capture it on the board.
 
 
 #### **Community agreements contribution (5 min)**
@@ -103,7 +102,7 @@ If no one talks… awkward silence:
 - "Take a minute to look at the board silently. What stands out?"
 
 
-If tension emerges
+If tension emerges:
 
 - "Sounds like there are some different perspectives here. That's useful but we don't need to resolve it today."
 
@@ -138,6 +137,6 @@ They need to *write their answers down* before Session 2. Check that they're doi
 
 ### :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
 
-- A studio that can't name any values beyond "we want to make good games" - don't we all! Too vague.
+- A studio that can't name any values beyond "we want to make good games" – don't we all! Too vague.
 - One person speaking for the group about "our" values
 - Values that are all abstract with no grounding in practice

content/curriculum/PS Guides/2-shared-purpose-alignment.md

@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
 
 ## **What happens in session**
 
-This session, we talk about the challenges of aligning on the studio's purpose.
+This session, we talk about the challenges of *aligning on the studio's purpose*.
 
-We go over common pitfalls - vague goals like "we all just want to make good games" and assuming shared politics means shared work values. We do four rounds of The Talk, asking detailed individual questions about financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, and decision-making styles. Studios practice this in their channels with the Peer Support present.
+We go over common pitfalls – vague goals like "we all just want to make good games" and assuming shared politics means shared work values. We do four rounds of The Talk, asking detailed individual questions about financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, and decision-making styles. Studios practice this in their channels with the Peer Support present.
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Decision-making:
 
 ### :triangular_ruler: **Format**
 
-Each person answers in turn (1.5-2 min each), use the Miro timer, brief open discussion after everyone answers, then move to next round.
+Each person answers in turn (2 min each), use the Miro timer, brief open discussion after everyone answers, then move to next round.
 
 The goal isn't to solve everything today, just to get the conversation started!
 
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ The goal isn't to solve everything today, just to get the conversation started!
 
 ### :world_map: **Context**
 
-In Session 2, studios practiced The Talk - four rounds covering financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, and decision-making styles. They started these conversations but didn't finish them (this is the intention). During this Studio Support Meeting, help them go deeper: create space to continue conversations that got cut short or stayed shallow, draw out what went unsaid, help the team notice patterns.
+In Session 2, studios practiced The Talk – four rounds covering financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, and decision-making styles. They started these conversations but didn't finish them (this is the intention). During this Studio Support Meeting, help them go deeper: Create space to continue conversations that got cut short or stayed shallow, draw out what went unsaid, help the team notice patterns.
 
 This is an ongoing practice!
 
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ This is an ongoing practice!
 ***For time and availability:***
 
 
-4. How many hours per week can you reliably, actually commit - a hard number.
+4. How many hours per week can you reliably, actually commit – a hard number.
 5. What's something that would cause you to miss a deadline? How would you want to handle that as a team?
 6. Are you building around one person's availability? Intentionally?
 
@@ -111,14 +111,16 @@ Give silence and let it be awkward. *You really need to relish the awkwardness.*
 - Is there something you noticed about a teammate's answer that you're still thinking about?
 - Is there an elephant in the room?
 
-If something big comes up: help them decide - "Is this something you want to keep talking about now, or table for later?"
+If something big comes up: help them decide – "Is this something you want to keep talking about now, or table for later?"
 
 
-4. Close and next steps (5 min) - "What's one thing you want to carry forward from this conversation?"
+### Close and next steps (5 min)
+
+"What's one thing you want to carry forward from this conversation?"
 
 Remind them: these conversations don't end here; tension is interesting information, not failure; they can bring things back to future PS sessions.
 
-**Nudge them on their Session 2 homework:** writing down tension points and unsaid questions. Check that they're doing this - we need this to build on later.
+**Nudge them on their Session 2 homework:** writing down tension points and unsaid questions. Check that they're doing this – we need this to build on later.
 
 ## :triangular_flag_on_post:**Red flags**
 
@@ -135,7 +137,7 @@ Note these for your PS check-in or message in the channel.
 
 **Duration:** 15-20 minutes (can be folded into the same meeting as Continuing The Talk, or done as a separate short check-in)
 
-**Context:** Session 2 homework asks each person to individually reflect on where they see the studio in 1/3/5 years and what their revenue model might look like. This isn't a formal exercise - it's a conversation starter. You're helping them notice where their assumptions about the studio's future align or diverge.
+**Context:** Session 2 homework asks each person to individually reflect on where they see the studio in 1/3/5 years and what their revenue model might look like. This is just a conversation starter. You're helping them notice where their assumptions about the studio's future align or diverge.
 
 
 **Before the conversation:**
@@ -145,21 +147,21 @@ Note these for your PS check-in or message in the channel.
 
 **How to facilitate:**
 
-Start with a round: each person shares one thing about where they see the studio. Keep it brief - you're listening for gaps, not building a business plan.
+Start with a round: Each person shares one thing about where they see the studio. Keep it brief – you're listening for gaps, not building a business plan.
 
 
 Prompts to draw out differences:
 
 - "When you picture the studio in three years, how many people are on the team?"
 - "Are you imagining one game, or multiple projects?"
-- "What does 'success' look like for you personally - not the studio, *you*?"
+- "What does 'success' look like for you personally – not the studio, *you*?"
 - "Is this your full-time thing, or alongside other work?"
 
 
 Then ground it:
 
 - "Who are your players? Do you know?"
-- "What's your revenue model - game sales, services, grants, a mix?"
+- "What's your revenue model – game sales, services, grants, a mix?"
 - "Can that sustain you? For how long?"
 - "What happens if the game takes twice as long as you think?"
 
@@ -177,7 +179,7 @@ Then ground it:
 
 
 :::tip
-**Tip:** **If you notice a big gap** - say, one person assumes this is a side project and another has quit their job for it - name it gently. "I'm noticing you might be picturing different scales here. Is that something you've talked about?" This is the kind of divergence that festers if it stays unspoken.
+**Tip:** **If you notice a big gap** – say, one person assumes this is a side project and another has quit their job for it – name it gently. "I'm noticing you might be picturing different scales here. Is that something you've talked about?" This is the kind of divergence that festers if it stays unspoken.
 
 :::
 
@@ -185,4 +187,4 @@ Then ground it:
 **After the conversation:**
 
 - Note any major alignment gaps for your PS check-in
-- They'll keep returning to scale and pace throughout the program - this is just the first pass
+- They'll keep returning to scale and pace throughout the program – this is just the first pass

content/curriculum/PS Guides/3-actionable-values-impact.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 If you are the presenting PS for this session, prepare a **10-minute** case study from your studio covering:
 
 - How you arrived at your current values (what process did you use? what changed through iteration?)
-- One example of values guiding a real decision — especially a hard one
+- One example of values guiding a real decision – especially a hard one
 - Where you've seen a gap between stated values and actual practice, and what you did about it
 
 Show the messy stuff. Participants need to see that this work is ongoing, not a one-time exercise.
@@ -14,17 +14,10 @@ Show the messy stuff. Participants need to see that this work is ongoing, not a
 
 Studios move from identifying values to making them operational. The session introduces two tools: the Why/What/How framework (turning values into concrete practices) and Layers of Effect (mapping ripple effects of decisions). A Peer Support presenter shares a case study from their own studio. Studios work through scenarios using values-first thinking and identify a decision to run through the tools with their PS this week.
 
-
-:::info
-If you are the presenting PS for this session, you need to prepare a **10-minute case study** from your studio covering: how you arrived at your current values, one example of values guiding a real decision (especially a hard one), and where you've seen a gap between stated values and actual practice. Show the messy stuff — participants need to see that this work is ongoing.
-
-:::
-
-
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
-- If presenting: deliver your case study. Be honest about what didn't work and what you're still figuring out.
-- Observe your studio during the scenario exercise — who applies values first vs. jumping to solutions?
+- If presenting: Deliver your case study. Be honest about what didn't work and what you're still figuring out.
+- Observe your studio during the scenario exercise – who applies values first vs. jumping to solutions?
 - Note whether studios can connect their Session 1 values to the tools, or if values are still too vague to be actionable.
 
 
@@ -47,7 +40,7 @@ If you are the presenting PS for this session, you need to prepare a **10-minute
 ### **👆 Before the session**
 
 - Confirm the Miro templates are set up and accessible
-- Review the studio's values map — pick 1-2 values that seem ripe for the Why/What/How exercise (have a suggestion ready in case the team gets stuck)
+- Review the studio's values map – pick 1-2 values that seem ripe for the Why/What/How exercise (have a suggestion ready in case the team gets stuck)
 - Know which decision they identified at the end of Session 3 for the Layers of Effect exercise
 
 
@@ -80,7 +73,7 @@ Prompts if they get stuck:
 Push for specificity:
 
 - "If a new member joined next month, how would they know you practice this value?"
-- "'We value transparency' — what does that mean concretely? Open finances? Open conversations? Open documents?"
+- "'We value transparency' – what does that mean concretely? Open finances? Open conversations? Open documents?"
 
 **Step 3: HOW (5-7 min)**
 
@@ -114,7 +107,7 @@ Use the decision they identified in Session 3. Walk through the three rings toge
 
 - What standards could this establish? What shifts over years?
 
-Use yellow stickies for opportunities/benefits and red for risks/costs. These might be connected — a benefit in one layer can create a risk in another.
+Use yellow stickies for opportunities/benefits and red for risks/costs. These might be connected – a benefit in one layer can create a risk in another.
 
 **Debrief (5 min):**
 
@@ -144,20 +137,20 @@ If they only see positive effects:
 
 If one person dominates the values conversation:
 
-- "Let's hear from everyone — whose experience of this value is different?"
+- "Let's hear from everyone – whose experience of this value is different?"
 
 
 ### **🏁 After the session**
 
 - Note whether the studio can translate values into practices or if they're still stuck at the abstract level
-- Note any gaps between stated values and emerging practices — these will come up again
+- Note any gaps between stated values and emerging practices – these will come up again
 - Remind them to discuss as a studio: how often should you revisit values and check your effects?
 
 
 ## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
 
-- Values that are all "why" with no "what" or "how" — inspiration without practice
-- A studio that can't see any negative effects of their decisions — lack of critical thinking or avoidance
+- Values that are all "why" with no "what" or "how" – inspiration without practice
+- A studio that can't see any negative effects of their decisions – lack of critical thinking or avoidance
 - One person defining "our" values without challenge from the group
 - Tools treated as a box-checking exercise rather than genuine reflection
 - "We already know our values" without being able to articulate practices

content/curriculum/PS Guides/4-decision-making-in-practice.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Studios explore cooperative decision-making frameworks (consensus, consent, majo
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
-- Observe the facilitation rotation activity — note how your studio members handle facilitating, participating, and observing
+- Observe the facilitation rotation activity – note how your studio members handle facilitating, participating, and observing
 - Listen for how they talk about where decisions currently happen (meetings? DMs? default to one person?)
 - Note whether anyone identifies informal hierarchy patterns during the journaling activity
 
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Studios explore cooperative decision-making frameworks (consensus, consent, majo
 
 - Make sure your studio understands the Informal Hierarchy Check-In questions and plans to work through them together
 - Confirm they've chosen which decision-making framework to practice this week
-- Check that they understand the difference between consensus and consent — this trips people up
+- Check that they understand the difference between consensus and consent – this trips people up
 
 
 ## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Decision-Making Practice + Informal Hierarchy Check-In**
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ Studios explore cooperative decision-making frameworks (consensus, consent, majo
 
 #### **Check-in (5 min)**
 
-"What did you notice in the facilitation rotation? What was harder than expected — facilitating, participating, or observing?"
+"What did you notice in the facilitation rotation? What was harder than expected – facilitating, participating, or observing?"
 
 #### **Practice a decision-making framework (20-25 min)**
 
@@ -54,19 +54,19 @@ Help the studio work through a real decision using their chosen framework.
 **Set up (3 min):**
 
 - Name the decision clearly. Write it down where everyone can see it.
-- Name the framework you're using — "We're going to try consent on this."
+- Name the framework you're using – "We're going to try consent on this."
 - Clarify: who is affected by this decision? Does everyone here need to be part of it?
 
 **Work through the decision-making steps (15-20 min):**
 
-1. Understand the context — what's happening? What do people feel about it?
-2. Identify the underlying need — what are we actually trying to address?
-3. Generate options — encourage weird ideas. Notice who contributes.
-4. Check alignment with values — how do these options fit with who you want to be?
-5. Evaluate consequences — who benefits, who's affected, trade-offs?
-6. Decide using the framework — name the method before you begin.
+1. Understand the context – what's happening? What do people feel about it?
+2. Identify the underlying need – what are we actually trying to address?
+3. Generate options – encourage weird ideas. Notice who contributes.
+4. Check alignment with values – how do these options fit with who you want to be?
+5. Evaluate consequences – who benefits, who's affected, trade-offs?
+6. Decide using the framework – name the method before you begin.
 7. Before finalizing: "Does anyone have concerns they haven't voiced? Is anyone agreeing just to move on?"
-8. Clarify implementation — who does what? When do you check back?
+8. Clarify implementation – who does what? When do you check back?
 
 **Debrief (5 min):**
 
@@ -87,11 +87,11 @@ Work through the five questions together. Go one at a time.
 
 Prompts to keep it exploratory, not accusatory:
 
-- "No guilt here — we're just noticing."
+- "No guilt here – we're just noticing."
 - "These patterns aren't problems yet. But under pressure, they become cracks."
 - "What would you want to change? What's actually fine?"
 
-Capture observations — they'll bring these to Session 5.
+Capture observations – they'll bring these to Session 5.
 
 
 #### **Close (5 min)**
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ Capture observations — they'll bring these to Session 5.
 
 #### **Map your current role distribution**
 
-This can be done async or as part of the PS meeting if there's time. The question is simple: for each role/responsibility in the studio, where did it come from — explicit decision or implicit default?
+This can be done async or as part of the PS meeting if there's time. The question is simple: for each role/responsibility in the studio, where did it come from – explicit decision or implicit default?
 
 Prompts:
 
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ This feeds directly into Session 5's governance work.
 
 If the decision-making practice feels artificial:
 
-- "The point isn't the outcome — it's noticing the process. How you decide matters as much as what you decide."
+- "The point is to *notice* the process. How you decide matters as much as what you decide."
 
 If one person dominates the decision:
 
@@ -129,26 +129,22 @@ If no one disagrees:
 
 - "That was quick! Is everyone actually aligned, or is someone going along to keep things moving?" (This is a direct reference to the dissent section from the session.)
 
-If the hierarchy check-in gets tense:
-
-- "This isn't about blame. The same name coming up a lot is information, not an indictment."
-
 If someone gets defensive:
 
-- "It's okay — noticing patterns is the hardest part. You don't need to fix anything today."
+- "It's okay – noticing patterns is the hardest part. You don't need to fix anything today."
 
 
 ### **🏁 After the session**
 
-- Note which patterns came up in the Informal Hierarchy Check-In — especially anything the studio seemed to avoid discussing
-- Note how the decision-making practice went — did they actually use the framework or fall back into old patterns?
+- Note which patterns came up in the Informal Hierarchy Check-In – especially anything the studio seemed to avoid discussing
+- Note how the decision-making practice went – did they actually use the framework or fall back into old patterns?
 - Bring observations to your PS check-in
 
 
 ## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
 
 - A studio that "decides" everything by default to one person and calls it delegation
-- Someone consistently going along without engaging — "I'm fine with whatever"
-- Resistance to the hierarchy check-in — "we don't have hierarchy, we're all equal" (everyone has patterns)
+- Someone consistently going along without engaging – "I'm fine with whatever"
+- Resistance to the hierarchy check-in – "we don't have hierarchy, we're all equal" (it's insidious)
 - Decisions happening outside the room (in DMs between two people) and being presented as done
 - The same person always facilitating, taking notes, or scheduling

content/curriculum/PS Guides/5-coop-structures-governance.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ## Pre-session
 
-If you are the presenting PS for this session, prep a **15–20 minute** case study from your studio covering:
+If you are the presenting PS for this session, prep a **15-20 minute** case study from your studio covering:
 
 - How your studio makes decisions now
 - What you tried that didn't work
@@ -10,21 +10,19 @@ If you are the presenting PS for this session, prep a **15–20 minute** case st
 
 ## **What happens in session**
 
-Studios learn about legal structures (sole prop, partnership, corporation, worker coop), governance models (collective governance, advice process, sociocratic circles, board + membership, DisCOs), and member management (adding, departing, removing members). A PS presenter shares a 15-20 minute case study on their studio's governance journey. The session introduces Community Rule as a tool for documenting governance in plain language. Key themes: making governance visible, designing structures from the patterns noticed in Session 4, and distinguishing between governance practice and legal incorporation.
-
-
-:::info
-If you are the presenting PS for this session, prepare a **15-20 minute case study** covering: how your studio makes decisions now, what you tried that didn't work, and one example of governance helping resolve a real issue. Be honest about the messy parts.
-
-:::
+Studios learn about:
+- legal structures (sole prop, partnership, corporation, worker coop)
+- governance models (collective governance, advice process, sociocratic circles, board + membership, DisCOs)
+- member management (adding, departing, removing members)
 
+A PS presenter shares a 15-20 minute case study on their studio's governance journey. We also introduce Community Rule as a tool for documenting governance in plain language. We focus on *making governance visible*, designing structures from the patterns noticed in Session 4, and distinguishing between governance practice and legal incorporation.
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
 - If presenting: deliver your case study
-- Observe how your studio responds to the governance models — what resonates? What causes confusion or resistance?
+- Observe how your studio responds to the governance models – what resonates? What causes confusion or resistance?
 - Listen for whether they connect their Session 4 Informal Hierarchy Check-In observations to governance design choices
-- Note how they react to the member removal discussion — this is often where discomfort shows up
+- Note how they react to the member removal discussion. It's an uncomfortable topic.
 
 
 ### 👆 **Your role after session**
@@ -38,14 +36,14 @@ If you are the presenting PS for this session, prepare a **15-20 minute case stu
 
 ### **📚 Materials**
 
-- [Community Rule](https://communityrule.info/) tool (open in browser)
+- [Community Rule](https://communityrule.info/) tool
 - Studio's Informal Hierarchy Check-In observations from Session 4
 - Notes on which governance model(s) interested them
 
 
 ### :world_map: **Context**
 
-This is a working session. You're helping the studio start documenting their governance in plain language using Community Rule. They don't need to finish — the goal is to surface where they already have answers vs. where they need more conversation. This draft will evolve.
+This is a working session. You're helping the studio start documenting their governance in plain language using Community Rule. They don't need to finish – the goal is to surface where they already have answers vs. where they need more conversation. This will be a living document.
 
 
 ### **👆 Before the session**
@@ -59,53 +57,39 @@ This is a working session. You're helping the studio start documenting their gov
 
 #### **Check-in (5 min)**
 
-"What governance model stuck with you from the session? Did anything click — or feel wrong?"
+"What governance model stuck with you from the session? Did anything click, or feel wrong?"
 
 
 #### **Community Rule walkthrough (10 min)**
 
-Open the tool together. Walk through the fields it asks for:
+Open the tool together. Community Rule works as a modular builder – you assemble your governance from pre-made or custom building blocks.
 
-- What is this community?
-- Who are the members? What qualifies someone for membership?
-- How are decisions made?
-- What roles exist?
-- How do you change these rules?
+Start with the basics: Name your studio and write a short summary of its structure.
 
-Don't try to fill everything in right away. Start by identifying which fields the studio can answer easily vs. which ones need more discussion.
+Then explore the module library together. There are four categories:
+
+- **Culture** – values, norms, purpose, solidarity, diversity
+- **Decision** – how decisions get made (lazy consensus, do-ocracy, vote, ranked choice, etc.)
+- **Process** – how policies are implemented and evolve (accountability process, delegation, transparency, dissolution, exclusion, etc.)
+- **Structure** – roles and internal entities (board, council, membership, ownership, roles, committee, etc.)
+
+Drag in the modules that feel relevant. Each one can be configured with key-value pairs – for example, a "Membership" module might have configuration like "Eligibility: active worker-owners who have completed a 3-month trial period." You can also create custom modules for anything the library doesn't cover.
+
+Don't try to build everything at once. Start by browsing the categories and noticing which modules the studio can configure easily vs. which ones lead to blank stares.
 
 Prompts:
 
-- "Where do you already have a clear answer?"
+- "Which of these are you already doing without naming it?"
 - "Where is there genuine disagreement or uncertainty?"
-- "Which of these have you been doing by default without naming it?"
-
+- "What's missing from the library that's specific to how you work?"
 
 #### **Draft together (20-25 min)**
 
-Start filling in what you can. Focus on the fields where there's energy or alignment. When you hit a field where there's disagreement, note it and move on — don't try to resolve everything today.
-
-**Key fields to prioritize:**
-
-**Decision-making:** "Based on what you practiced in Session 4, what framework are you leaning toward for different types of decisions?"
-
-- Major decisions (new members, large spending, creative direction shifts)
-- Day-to-day decisions (task assignment, meeting scheduling)
-- Emergency/time-sensitive decisions
-
-**Roles:** "What roles do you actually need right now? Who's doing them? Was that decided or default?"
-
-Connect back to their role distribution mapping from last week.
-
-**Membership:** "This is the hard one. What happens when someone wants to join? When someone wants to leave? When someone needs to leave?"
-
-- You don't need to resolve this today. Just surface where assumptions differ.
-- If they resist discussing removal: "I know this is uncomfortable. But having a process before you need it is a form of care."
-
+Start filling in what you can. Focus on the modules where there's energy or alignment. When you hit a field where there's disagreement, note it and move on. Don't try to resolve everything today.
 
 #### **Close and gaps list (5 min)**
 
-- Make a list of fields that still need discussion
+- Make a list of areas that still need discussion
 - "What's the most important unresolved question?"
 - "Who's going to take a first pass at writing up what we decided today?"
 
@@ -121,18 +105,18 @@ This is prep for Session 6 (Equitable Economics). Check in during the week:
 - "Has everyone spent some time thinking about the financial sustainability question?"
 - "And the personal reflection: what financial information have you never been allowed to see at work?"
 
-These don't need to be discussed as a studio yet — just make sure individuals are reflecting.
+These don't need to be discussed as a studio yet – just make sure individuals are reflecting.
 
 
 ### :star: **Tips**
 
 If they want to pick a governance model immediately:
 
-- "You don't have to commit today. Start with collective governance or advice process — you can add complexity as you learn what you actually need."
+- "You don't have to commit today. Start with collective governance or advice process – you can add complexity as you learn what you actually need."
 
 If Community Rule feels bureaucratic:
 
-- "Think of it as making the invisible visible. You're already doing governance — this just names it."
+- "You're already doing governance – this just helps you name it."
 
 If they skip over membership/removal:
 
@@ -142,23 +126,19 @@ If one person is doing all the talking about governance:
 
 - "Governance designed by one person is just management with extra steps. Everyone needs to shape this."
 
-If time runs short:
-
-- Prioritize decision-making and roles. Membership can be returned to next week.
-
 
 ### **🏁 After the session**
 
 - Note where the studio has clear alignment vs. where they got stuck
-- Note any tension around membership/removal — these conversations will deepen
+- Note any tension around membership/removal – these conversations will deepen
 - Remind them about the financial sustainability reflection for Session 6 prep
 - Bring the draft status to your PS check-in
 
 
 ## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
 
-- A studio that resists documenting anything — "we just know how we work" (that's exactly the problem)
+- A studio that resists documenting anything – "we just know how we work" (exactly the problem)
 - Governance designed around one person's strengths or preferences
 - Avoiding the membership/removal conversation entirely
-- Confusing governance with incorporation — "we're not a real coop yet so we don't need this"
+- Confusing governance with incorporation – "we're not a real coop yet so we don't need this"
 - A draft that looks perfect on paper but doesn't match how the studio actually operates

content/curriculum/PS Guides/6-equitable-economics.md

@@ -13,10 +13,10 @@ This is a dense session covering revenue sources, financial transparency, compen
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
-- Observe how your studio reacts to the compensation models discussion — where do they light up? Where do they tense up?
-- Listen for financial information gaps — who has financial literacy? Who doesn't?
+- Observe how your studio reacts to the compensation models discussion – where do they light up? Where do they tense up?
+- Listen for financial information gaps – who has financial literacy? Who doesn't?
 - Note whether anyone avoids the personal financial sustainability question
-- Watch the IP ownership discussion — this can surface unexpected disagreements, especially if someone brought existing work into the project
+- Watch the IP ownership discussion – this can surface unexpected disagreements, especially if someone brought existing work into the project
 
 
 ### 👆 **Your role after session**
@@ -37,28 +37,28 @@ This is a dense session covering revenue sources, financial transparency, compen
 
 ### :world_map: **Context**
 
-Money is where values meet reality. This studio support meeting helps the studio have the financial conversations that most groups avoid. Your role is to create enough safety for vulnerability while pushing past surface-level comfort. These conversations don't need to reach decisions today — they need to *happen*.
+Money is where values meet reality. This studio support meeting helps the studio have the financial conversations that most groups avoid. Your role is to create enough safety for vulnerability while pushing past surface-level comfort. These conversations don't need to reach decisions today – they need to *happen*.
 
 
 ### **👆 Before the session**
 
-- Check in with each studio member (or the group) about whether they've started reflecting on the homework questions
-- Review the studio's governance draft — what did they decide about financial decision-making?
-- Be prepared for this session to be emotionally charged. Money reveals power dynamics and personal vulnerabilities.
+- Check in about whether they've started reflecting on the homework questions
+- Review the studio's governance draft – what did they decide about financial decision-making?
+- Be prepared for this session to be emotionally charged
 
 
 ### **🌊 Session flow**
 
 #### **Check-in (5 min)**
 
-"The session covered a lot of ground about money. What's sitting with you? Anything surprising — or anything you're dreading talking about?"
+"The session covered a lot of ground about money. What's sitting with you? Anything surprising – or anything you're dreading talking about?"
 
 
 #### **Financial transparency (15-20 min)**
 
 Start with the personal reflection prompt from Session 5 homework:
 
-"What financial information have you never been allowed to see at work — and what would have been different if you had?"
+"What financial information have you never been allowed to see at work. What might have been different if you had?"
 
 Let each person share. This grounds the conversation in lived experience before it becomes abstract.
 
@@ -73,10 +73,10 @@ Then move to the studio:
 **Practical questions:**
 
 - "Who currently knows the most about the studio's finances? Is that a choice or a default?"
-- "If you were to do open books — what would that actually look like? A shared spreadsheet? Monthly summaries? Full access to accounts?"
+- "If you were to do open books – what would that actually look like? A shared spreadsheet? Monthly summaries? Full access to accounts?"
 - "What's one step you could take this week toward more transparency?"
 
-Don't push anyone to share financial details they're not ready to share. The goal is naming the discomfort, not forcing disclosure.
+Don't push anyone to share financial details they're not ready to. The goal is *naming the discomfort*.
 
 
 #### **Compensation models (15-20 min)**
@@ -92,18 +92,18 @@ Review the four models briefly:
 
 - "What feels fair to you? Where do you notice tension between 'fair' and 'comfortable'?"
 - "What would you need to know about each other's situations to decide together?"
-- "Which model aligns best with your stated values?"
+- "Which model aligns best with your values?"
 
 **Dig deeper:**
 
 - "If you chose equal pay, what happens when one person is working 40 hours and another is working 15?"
 - "If you chose needs-based, who decides what counts as a 'need'?"
-- "If you chose role-based, who decides which roles are worth more — and doesn't that recreate hierarchy?"
+- "If you chose role-based, who decides which roles are worth more – and doesn't that recreate hierarchy?"
 
-You don't need to reach a decision. You need to surface where assumptions differ.
+You don't need to reach a decision.
 
 
-#### **IP ownership — first pass (5-10 min)**
+#### **IP ownership – first pass (5-10 min)**
 
 If there's time, and only if the studio is ready:
 
@@ -111,14 +111,14 @@ If there's time, and only if the studio is ready:
 - "Has anyone brought existing work into the project? What happens to that?"
 - "What happens to IP if someone leaves?"
 
-If these questions create tension, name it: "This is exactly the kind of conversation that gets harder the longer you wait. You don't need answers today — just notice where you're not aligned."
+If these questions create tension, name it: "This is the kind of conversation that gets harder the longer you wait. Notice where you're not aligned."
 
 
 #### **Close (5 min)**
 
 - "What's one financial conversation your team has been avoiding?"
 - "What's one concrete step you can take before next session?"
-- Remind them: Session 7 is about conflict — and money is often where conflict shows up first
+- Remind them: Session 7 is about conflict – and money is often where conflict shows up first
 
 
 ### :star: **Tips**
@@ -129,11 +129,11 @@ If someone shuts down:
 
 If the group avoids specifics:
 
-- "Saying 'we'll figure it out later' is the most common way studios avoid financial conversations. What's one specific thing you can decide or discuss today?"
+- "Saying 'we'll figure it out later' is a to avoid financial conversations. Try to think of a specific decision to discuss today."
 
 If one person has significantly more financial literacy:
 
-- "Part of transparency is making sure everyone can participate in financial decisions. Can you explain that in simpler terms?"
+- "Part of transparency is making sure everyone can participate in financial decisions. Can you explain that in plain terms?"
 
 If there's a clear financial power imbalance:
 
@@ -146,9 +146,9 @@ If they want to decide compensation now:
 
 ### **🏁 After the session**
 
-- Note how the financial conversations went — where was there openness vs. avoidance?
+- Note how the financial conversations went – where was there openness vs. avoidance?
 - Note any power dynamics around financial literacy or financial resources
-- Note any IP ownership disagreements — these need to be resolved before incorporation
+- Note any IP ownership disagreements – these need to be resolved before incorporation
 - Bring observations to your PS check-in
 
 
@@ -156,8 +156,8 @@ If they want to decide compensation now:
 
 - One person controlling all financial information or decisions
 - Someone minimizing their own financial needs to match the group
-- "We don't need to talk about money yet" — avoidance that will become a crisis later
+- "We don't need to talk about money yet" – avoidance that will become a crisis later
 - Financial plans that assume best-case scenarios with no contingency
 - Major gaps in financial literacy that no one is addressing
-- IP ownership assumptions that haven't been discussed — especially if someone brought pre-existing work
+- IP ownership assumptions that haven't been discussed – especially if someone brought pre-existing work
 - Compensation discussions where one person's opinion is treated as the default

content/curriculum/PS Guides/7-conflict-resolution-collective-care.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ## Pre-session
 
-- Review Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy) before session — this is the template participants will adapt for homework
+- Review Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy) before session – this is the template participants will adapt for homework
 - Check in with your studio about how their compensation discussions went; any friction that came up is useful for this session
 
 ## **What happens in session**
@@ -11,17 +11,17 @@ The heaviest session. Studios learn to reframe conflict as data (not failure), d
 
 
 :::warning
-**Before this session:** review Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy). Check in with your studio about how their compensation discussions went — any friction that came up is useful material for this session.
+**Before this session:** review Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy). Check in with your studio about how their compensation discussions went – any friction that came up is useful material for this session.
 
 :::
 
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
-- Observe how your studio responds to the conflict reframing — relief, resistance, or discomfort can all be informative
-- Watch the activity closely — are they able to use behaviourally-specific feedback or do they slide into judgments?
+- Observe how your studio responds to the conflict reframing – relief, resistance, or discomfort can all be informative
+- Watch the activity closely – are they able to use behaviourally-specific feedback or do they slide into judgments?
 - Note whether anyone identifies conflicts they've been avoiding
-- Pay attention to body language during the accountability discussion — who checks out? Who leans in?
+- Pay attention to body language during the accountability discussion – who checks out? Who leans in?
 
 
 ### 👆 **Your role after session**
@@ -42,15 +42,15 @@ The heaviest session. Studios learn to reframe conflict as data (not failure), d
 
 ### :world_map: **Context**
 
-This PS meeting has two parts: (1) helping the studio name an avoided tension, and (2) reviewing the conflict resolution template together. The order matters — naming a real tension first gives the template review practical grounding. But read the room. If the tension-naming conversation goes deep, let it run and abbreviate the template review. The real work is the conversation, not the document.
+This PS meeting has two parts: (1) helping the studio name an avoided tension, and (2) reviewing the conflict resolution template together. The order matters – naming a real tension first gives the template review practical grounding. But read the room. If the tension-naming conversation goes deep, let it run and abbreviate the template review. The real work is the conversation, not the document.
 
 This may be the most emotionally demanding PS meeting. Be prepared to hold space without trying to fix everything.
 
 
 ### **👆 Before the session**
 
-- Review the Baby Ghosts conflict resolution policy and procedures yourself — know the structure well enough to guide a discussion
-- Reflect on what you observed during the session and the compensation discussion last week — is there an unresolved tension you've noticed?
+- Review the Baby Ghosts conflict resolution policy and procedures yourself – know the structure well enough to guide a discussion
+- Reflect on what you observed during the session and the compensation discussion last week – is there an unresolved tension you've noticed?
 - Check your own readiness. If you're carrying a lot from your own studio or personal life, be honest with yourself about your capacity to hold space today.
 
 
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ This isn't a throwaway question. Give it real space. If someone needs to talk, l
 
 :::
 
-"What conflict or tension has your studio been avoiding? It doesn't have to be big — small avoidances are actually great to examine."
+"What conflict or tension has your studio been avoiding? It doesn't have to be big – small avoidances are actually great to examine."
 
 **If no one speaks up immediately**, let the silence sit. Count to 15 in your head before you intervene. Then try:
 
@@ -138,11 +138,11 @@ If it gets heated:
 
 If someone minimizes:
 
-- "You said 'it's not a big deal' — but you brought it up. Can you say more about why it's on your mind?"
+- "You said 'it's not a big deal' – but you brought it up. Can you say more about why it's on your mind?"
 
 If someone deflects to structural issues to avoid interpersonal ones (or vice versa):
 
-- "It can be both. What's the structural part, and what's the interpersonal part? Which one are you more comfortable talking about — and which one are you avoiding?"
+- "It can be both. What's the structural part, and what's the interpersonal part? Which one are you more comfortable talking about – and which one are you avoiding?"
 
 If the template review feels abstract:
 
@@ -151,18 +151,18 @@ If the template review feels abstract:
 
 ### **🏁 After the session**
 
-- Note how the tension-naming went — did something real surface, or did the studio stay safe?
-- Note how they responded to the conflict resolution template — did they engage or treat it as a formality?
+- Note how the tension-naming went – did something real surface, or did the studio stay safe?
+- Note how they responded to the conflict resolution template – did they engage or treat it as a formality?
 - If any individual seems affected, follow up with them directly
-- Bring observations to your PS check-in — especially anything that concerns you about studio dynamics
+- Bring observations to your PS check-in – especially anything that concerns you about studio dynamics
 
 
 ## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
 
-- A studio that insists they have no conflicts — avoidance is not peace
+- A studio that insists they have no conflicts – avoidance is not peace
 - Someone who identifies a conflict but then immediately retracts: "never mind, it's fine"
-- Conflict always attributed to one person — scapegoating
+- Conflict always attributed to one person – scapegoating
 - Political framing used to avoid naming emotional experience (the emotional-political conflation trap from the session)
 - A studio that wants the policy "just in case" but clearly has an active, unnamed conflict
-- Someone who seems shut down or dissociated — check in with them privately after
+- Someone who seems shut down or dissociated – check in with them privately after
 - Performative agreement: "I'm fine with whatever the group decides" when they clearly aren't

content/curriculum/PS Guides/8-self-evaluation-pathways.md

@@ -13,10 +13,10 @@ This is a closing session. Your role is less about facilitating new content and
 
 ### :eyes: **Your role during session**
 
-- Observe how your studio approaches the assessments — honest and reflective, or rushing through?
+- Observe how your studio approaches the assessments – honest and reflective, or rushing through?
 - During the studio assessment, note whether they're aligned on their ratings or if there's disagreement about where they actually are
-- Watch for emotional responses during the closing — this program has been intense, and endings can surface unexpected feelings
-- Participate in the zine activity and closing — you're part of this community
+- Watch for emotional responses during the closing – this program has been intense, and endings can surface unexpected feelings
+- Participate in the zine activity and closing – you're part of this community
 
 
 ### 👆 **Your role after session**
@@ -44,14 +44,14 @@ Your weekly PS sessions end after this week, but you're still part of the commun
 
 ### :world_map: **Context**
 
-This is your last formal PS meeting with this studio. The goal is to help them complete their assessments with honesty and specificity, and to set them up for continuing this work without you. Resist the urge to sugarcoat or wrap things up neatly. The most useful thing you can do is help them see clearly where they are — strengths and gaps alike.
+This is your last formal PS meeting with this studio. The goal is to help them complete their assessments with honesty and specificity, and to set them up for continuing this work without you. Resist the urge to sugarcoat or wrap things up neatly. The most useful thing you can do is help them see clearly where they are – strengths and gaps alike.
 
 
 ### **👆 Before the session**
 
-- Review your notes from the full program — what patterns have you noticed? What's shifted? What's stayed stuck?
+- Review your notes from the full program – what patterns have you noticed? What's shifted? What's stayed stuck?
 - Review the studio's Community Rule draft, values map, and any other documents they've produced
-- Prepare your own honest assessment of where the studio is — you'll use this to calibrate if their self-assessment seems off
+- Prepare your own honest assessment of where the studio is – you'll use this to calibrate if their self-assessment seems off
 - Think about what you want to say to this studio at the close. This matters.
 
 
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ Let this be genuine. Some people will be relieved, some sad, some anxious about
 
 If they haven't completed the personal assessment yet, give them quiet time to work on it now.
 
-This is private — you don't need to see it or discuss it. But you can offer:
+This is private – you don't need to see it or discuss it. But you can offer:
 
 - "Take your time with this. Be honest with yourself."
 - "Where have you grown? Where do you still feel uncertain?"
@@ -81,11 +81,11 @@ If they've already completed it, ask: "Was anything surprising when you reflecte
 
 Work through the seven areas together. For each, the studio rates themselves 1-5:
 
-1. **Considering/Reflecting** — Thought about individually, not discussed as a team
-2. **Discussing Collectively** — Talking together but no decisions
-3. **Brainstorming** — Actively generating ideas and exploring options
-4. **Sifting/Sorting** — Narrowing down, making choices, working toward alignment
-5. **First Draft of Documentation** — Something written down — a policy, process, or shared agreement
+1. **Considering/Reflecting** – Thought about individually, not discussed as a team
+2. **Discussing Collectively** – Talking together but no decisions
+3. **Brainstorming** – Actively generating ideas and exploring options
+4. **Sifting/Sorting** – Narrowing down, making choices, working toward alignment
+5. **First Draft of Documentation** – Something written down – a policy, process, or shared agreement
 
 **Go through each area:**
 
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ Work through the seven areas together. For each, the studio rates themselves 1-5
 
 **5. Conflict & repair**
 
-- "Do you have a conflict process — even informal? Have you used it?"
+- "Do you have a conflict process – even informal? Have you used it?"
 - "What tension have you named? What's still unnamed?"
 
 **6. Program reflection**
@@ -126,15 +126,15 @@ Work through the seven areas together. For each, the studio rates themselves 1-5
 
 **Your role during this:**
 
-If a rating seems inflated — gently push:
+If a rating seems inflated – gently push:
 
 - "You rated governance a 4, but last week you hadn't discussed membership or removal. What's your thinking?"
 
-If a rating seems deflated — acknowledge progress:
+If a rating seems deflated – acknowledge progress:
 
 - "You rated conflict a 2, but you named and addressed a real tension two weeks ago. That's meaningful progress."
 
-If there's disagreement on a rating — that's data:
+If there's disagreement on a rating – that's data:
 
 - "You see yourselves differently on this one. That's worth exploring. What does each of you see?"
 
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ If anyone is interested in becoming a PS for a future cohort, encourage them to
 
 #### **Close (5-10 min)**
 
-This is your moment. Share what you've observed over the program — what you're proud of, what you're hopeful about, where you think they'll need to stay vigilant.
+This is your moment. Share what you've observed over the program – what you're proud of, what you're hopeful about, where you think they'll need to stay vigilant.
 
 Be specific. "You've grown" is less useful than "In Session 2, no one would say what they actually needed financially. By Session 6, you had that conversation and it was hard but you did it."
 
@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ End with care. This matters.
 
 If they rush through the assessment:
 
-- "This is the last structured reflection you'll do with support. Take the time — it's worth it."
+- "This is the last structured reflection you'll do with support. Take the time – it's worth it."
 
 If they rate everything high:
 
@@ -195,15 +195,15 @@ If emotions come up:
 
 - Ensure the studio assessment is submitted (goes to Baby Ghosts)
 - Ensure each person has completed or will complete their personal assessment
-- Share your own PS observations with the program team — what this studio needs going forward, what to watch for, where they're strong
+- Share your own PS observations with the program team – what this studio needs going forward, what to watch for, where they're strong
 - Thank the studio. Mean it.
 
 
 ## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
 
-- A studio that can't complete the assessment because they disagree on where they are — this reveals deeper alignment issues
-- Rushing through to "get it done" — avoidance of reflection
-- Ratings that don't match what you've observed — denial or lack of self-awareness
-- No plan for continuing governance practices after the program — high risk of drift
-- One person taking responsibility for everything post-program — that's not a coop
-- Signs that the program surfaced issues the studio hasn't resolved — make sure the program team knows
+- A studio that can't complete the assessment because they disagree on where they are – this reveals deeper alignment issues
+- Rushing through to "get it done" – avoidance of reflection
+- Ratings that don't match what you've observed – denial or lack of self-awareness
+- No plan for continuing governance practices after the program – high risk of drift
+- One person taking responsibility for everything post-program – that's not a coop
+- Signs that the program surfaced issues the studio hasn't resolved – make sure the program team knows

content/curriculum/PS Guides/pre-program-onboarding-and-prep.md

@@ -44,4 +44,5 @@ Use this list to get a baseline read on your studio. These are things to *notice
 - You don't need to resolve anything yet, just notice.
 - Bring observations to your PS check-in.
 
+
 *Credit:* **Effective Practices in Starting Co-ops** *and Christine Clarke of __[Freedom Dreams](https://www.freedomdreamscoop.com/)__ for inspiration/starting points.*

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 0 – Kickoff + Onboarding.md

@@ -51,6 +51,16 @@ We'll begin building the relational trust and shared accountability that will ca
 
 **SLIDE: Coop Journey Map** *(visual showing: pre-formation to formation to operation)*
 
+First, let's look at the statistics:
+
+- Small business startup success rate: ~20% (8 in 10 fail)
+- Cooperative startup success rate: ~40% (6 in 10 fail)
+- Co-ops significantly outperform conventional startups – but it's still not a guarantee
+
+**You're still going against the odds. But it's a worthwhile thing to do, because you learn so much.**
+
+Being a co-op improves your odds, it doesn't eliminate risk.
+
 This program focuses on **pre-formation** - the relational and governance groundwork that determines whether your co-op will thrive or struggle. 
 
 Most resources out there focus on the legal and operational stuff: how to incorporate, how to file paperwork, how to structure bylaws. That matters, of course! But it's not where studios fail.
@@ -65,7 +75,7 @@ This program exists to build the foundation *before* you incorporate. By the end
 
 ---
 
-### Program overview (high-level) - 10 min
+### Program overview - 10 min
 
 - Program schedule, session themes, and format
 - Gamma Space / Slack explanation
@@ -78,25 +88,7 @@ This program exists to build the foundation *before* you incorporate. By the end
 
 *Note: Much of this info will also live in a Slack Canvas for reference.*
 
----
-
-### What this program will (and won't) do - 5 min
-
-This program will give you tools to:
-
-- Notice when informal hierarchy forms and decide together what to do about it  
-- Have hard conversations about money, power, and expectations  
-- Make decisions collectively without defaulting to a single founder or loudest voice  
-- Navigate conflict as valuable data
-
-This program will NOT:
-
-- Make you hierarchy-free
-- Tell you exactly how to structure your co-op (that's yours to decide)
-- Eliminate disagreement - it's healthy, after all!
-- Do the hard conversations for you
-
-*We're here to support you, but the work is yours.*
+This program will give you tools to notice when informal hierarchy forms, have hard conversations about money, power, and expectations, make decisions collectively, and navigate conflict as valuable data. It will NOT make you hierarchy-free, tell you exactly how to structure your co-op, eliminate disagreement, or do the hard conversations for you. *We're here to support you, but the work is yours.*
 
 ---
 
@@ -120,8 +112,8 @@ We bring these questions up to normalize friction. And because unspoken assumpti
 
 A few things to reframe…
 
-- Discomfort doesn't mean something is wrong. It often means something important is coming up.  
-- Disagreement is data. It tells you something isn't clear and gives you an opportunity to include more people.  
+- Discomfort often means something important is coming up.  
+- Disagreement tells you something isn't clear and gives you an opportunity to include more people.
 - If everything feels easy, you might not be going deep enough.
 
 We're here to support you through the hard parts - that's what Peer Supports are for. But we can't do the hard conversations for you.
@@ -132,9 +124,9 @@ We're here to support you through the hard parts - that's what Peer Supports are
 
 Let's talk about what commitment actually means in this program.
 
-Time - ~2-3 hours per week (sessions + homework + Peer Support meetings). Some weeks will be heavier. If you can't make a session, let us know - recordings are available, but live participation matters.
+Time - About 2-3 hours per week (sessions + homework + Studio Support meetings). Some weeks will be heavier. If you can't make a session, let us know - recordings are available, but live participation is really important.
 
-Openness - This work asks you to be vulnerable with your collaborators. To say what you actually think, to hear things you might not want to hear - this will take energy.
+Openness - This work asks you to be vulnerable with your collaborators: To say what you actually think, to hear things you might not want to hear - this will take energy and might be unfamiliar. Give it your best shot.
 
 Money - You're receiving a grant as part of this program. That comes with accountability - to yourself, your studio, and the cohort.
 
@@ -185,10 +177,6 @@ Complete this in your private Miro board before Session 1.
 
 ---
 
-### Grant payment info - 2 min
-
----
-
 ### Closing - 5 min
 
 - Each person shares one intention or hope for the program  

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 1 – Coop Principles and Power.md

@@ -5,11 +5,12 @@
 - Slide: Tag Yourself activity
 - Slide: Anonymous feedback form reminder
 
+---
 ## Intro - 3 min
 
 Working in an environment that focuses solely on shipping, profit, and growth denies us the opportunity to practice our values collectively. Worse, the outcome of those capitalist values is exploitation and dehumanization of everyone but whoever is at the top of the org chart. How can we connect with our deepest-held values to shape collective practices that challenge this harmful hierarchy?
 
-We have some guidance to start with: the principles adopted in 1995 by the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA), which now form the ethical foundation for cooperative work around the world and are deeply reflected in cooperative history and practice in the Global South. We'll trace a line from these principles to your personal and shared values, and then to what cooperative practice can look like in your context.
+We have some guidance to start with: The principles adopted in 1995 by the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA), which now form the ethical foundation for cooperative work around the world and are deeply reflected in cooperative history and practice in the Global South. We'll trace a line from these principles to your personal and shared values, and then to what cooperative practice can look like in your context.
 
 Through this work, we can create a culture that stands up to extraction and burnout, and practice something different in its place.
 
@@ -21,7 +22,7 @@ Today we’ll be talking about:
 
 - How to cooperate (cooperative capacities)  
 - Coop histories/lineages  
-- The cooperative principles  
+- The ICA cooperative principles  
 - How to move from the principles to values
 
 ### Check-in - 5 min
@@ -29,7 +30,7 @@ Today we’ll be talking about:
 *Thinking back on the Power Flower reflection you did...*
 
 - what's one thing you noticed about yourself that you hadn't named before?  
-- no need to share details -- just notice what came up
+- no need to share details, unless you are compelled! Just notice what came up
 
 ---
 
@@ -39,7 +40,7 @@ We've been socially and economically shaped by systems that reward competition,
 
 "Most human beings have a natural propensity to cooperate." -- Russ Christianson, *Effective Practices in Starting Co-ops*
 
-The capacity exists. We already practice solidarity economics in daily life without calling it that when we contribute to a GoFundMe or babysit our neighbor's kids. But these practices get buried under what Black economist Jessica Gordon Nembhard calls "the assumptions of neo-liberal capitalist ideology."
+The capacity exists. We already practice solidarity economics in daily life without calling it that when we contribute to a GoFundMe or babysit our neighbour's kids. But these practices get buried under what Black economist Jessica Gordon Nembhard calls "the assumptions of neo-liberal capitalist ideology."
 
 Can cooperation be recovered and practiced until it's reliable?
 
@@ -56,13 +57,13 @@ We're going to introduce tools throughout this program, but tools only work if y
 Here's what we'll be practicing:
 
 **Active listening**  
-This means unlearning the tendency to simply wait for your turn to talk. It means actually focusing on the other person and trying to understand what they really mean, especially when you disagree. One practice to support this is reflecting back what you hear.
+This means unlearning the tendency to simply wait for your turn to talk. It means actually focusing on the other person and trying to understand what they really mean, especially when you disagree. One practice to support this is reflecting back what you hear. You can also take notes.
 
 **Honest communication**  
-Without making accusations, say what you actually think, and use "I" statements. The purpose is to open up conversation.
+Without making accusations, say what you actually think, and use "I" statements. The purpose is to open conversation up wider.
 
 **Perspective-taking**  
-Your collaborators experience situations differently from you, and from each other.
+Your collaborators experience situations differently from you, and from each other. Try to put yourself in their position/mindset and hear what they are telling you about what they are feeling.
 
 **Emotional self-regulation**  
 It can be difficult, without prior practice, to stay present when things get uncomfortable instead of shutting down, lashing out, or agreeing just to make the tension stop. Notice discomfort and choose how to respond rather than just reacting.
@@ -71,7 +72,7 @@ It can be difficult, without prior practice, to stay present when things get unc
 Do you talk first? Go quiet when you disagree? Say yes to avoid tension? Take over tasks because it's faster than explaining? Notice your ingrained habits!
 
 **Giving and receiving feedback**
-This is a tough one for a lot of people. When you have a concern, do you hedge so much it disappears? And when you hear critical feedback, do you get defensive or collapse? Both directions are skills.
+This is a tough one for a lot of people. When you have a concern, do you hedge so much it disappears? And when you hear critical feedback, do you get defensive or collapse? Both directions are skills. Look at feedback as a *gift*.
 
 None of these are natural talents, but all of them can be practiced. In fact, you'll be practicing them throughout this program, starting next session!
 
@@ -79,9 +80,9 @@ None of these are natural talents, but all of them can be practiced. In fact, yo
 
 ---
 
-### Cooperative lineages -- and whose knowledge gets credited - 10 min
+### Cooperative lineages – and whose knowledge gets credited - 10 min
 
-The foundational principles of cooperatives are rooted in survival. But the Rochdale Pioneers of 1844, often credited as cooperative "founders," didn't invent cooperation -- they simply codified practices that had existed for millennia. We’ll cover those principles in a minute, but first let’s talk about the longer lineages of cooperative history.
+The foundational principles of cooperatives are rooted in survival. But the Rochdale Pioneers of 1844, often credited as cooperative "founders," didn't invent cooperation – they simply codified practices that had existed for millennia. We’ll cover those principles in a minute, but first let’s talk about the longer lineages of cooperative history.
 
 - Indigenous communities worldwide practiced mutual aid, collective resource management, and consensus decision-making long before European contact. Many Indigenous governance systems also held space for Two-Spirit people in leadership and decision-making roles.  
 - Enslaved and formerly enslaved Black communities in the Americas created mutual aid societies, burial societies, and informal credit systems out of necessity and survival  
@@ -98,7 +99,7 @@ The Rochdale Pioneers formalized these practices into a movement. But when we cr
 
 Source: *Locating the Contributions of the African Diaspora in the Canadian Co-operative Sector* [WIKILINK-01: needs URL] Additional info: [Indigenous Governance and Tomorrow's Democracy](https://www.colorado.edu/lab/medlab/2025/07/28/indigenous-governance-and-tomorrows-democracy-join-conversation)
 
-This matters for us because you likely already hold cooperative knowledge. It's in your family, your culture, your community.
+This matters for us because you may already hold cooperative knowledge. It could be in your family, your culture, your community.
 
 Consider your own "cooperative lineage":
 
@@ -109,14 +110,14 @@ Consider your own "cooperative lineage":
 
 Or:
 
-- Why did you become interested in forming a game studio coop?
+- Why did you become interested in forming a cooperative?
 
 Most of these practices go unnamed as "cooperative" but they are part of a long, global, grassroots, and informal tradition.
 
 There are many types of cooperatives (coop housing, community land trusts, community financing like credit unions, worker cooperatives like you’re trying to build) – but also barter clubs, fair trade, solidarity markets.   
 [TODO-IMAGE-02: Types of cooperatives/solidarity economy image from art.coop]
 
-Cooperatives are expansive and these skills are already in your toolkit!
+Cooperatives are expansive and we can add skills to your toolkit!
 
 Share one cooperative practice from your experience in the chat. *And pay attention to what values are present.*
 
@@ -135,7 +136,7 @@ Brief large group share - 5 min: Each group shares 1-2 values they identified.
 
 The values you just named have been recognized and formalized by cooperative movements worldwide. In 1995, the International Cooperative Alliance adopted these 7 principles that now guide cooperative work globally.
 
-*For each principle, consider How might your co-op incorporate this principle? What policies or practices would bring it to life?*
+*For each principle, consider: How might your co-op incorporate this principle? What policies or practices would bring it to life?*
 
 ### 1. Voluntary and Open Membership
 
@@ -209,7 +210,7 @@ Where do we meet each other? And how do we build from there?
 
 ---
 
-## Homework (with Peer Supports) - 10 min
+## Homework - 10 min
 
 1. **Journal about your values** – What values guide your work or collective efforts? Your values can be discovered through observation. Your task isn't to decide what matters to you, but to notice what already does.
     - What holds your attention without effort?
@@ -219,7 +220,7 @@ Where do we meet each other? And how do we build from there?
 
 1. **Do the team values map with your Peer Supports** – Use your PS session to do the values mapping exercise as a team. Where do you align? Where do you differ?
 
-2. **Prep individually for "The Talk" (Session 2)** – Next session, you'll practice having direct conversations about money, time, skills, and decision-making with your collaborators. Reflect on these questions –**write your answers down** before we meet. Try to time-box to about 5 minutes per section.
+2. **Prep individually for "The Talk" (Session 2)** – Next session, you'll practice having direct conversations about money, time, skills, and decision-making with your collaborators. Reflect on these questions – **write your answers down** before we meet. Try to time-box to about 5 minutes per section.
 
    **Financial reality:**
 
@@ -247,7 +248,9 @@ Where do we meet each other? And how do we build from there?
 
    And finally: **Does being part of this studio make you feel something? What is that feeling?**
 
-   Adapted from Obvious Agency's "The Talk" worksheet. *These are for you first. You'll share with your team in Session 2.*
+   Adapted from Obvious Agency's "The Talk" worksheet.
+   
+   *These are for **you** first. You'll share with your team in Session 2.*
 
 ---
 
@@ -259,7 +262,7 @@ It might seem easy and fun to chat about these ideas with your collaborators, bu
 
 Studios built around a shared problem - "we can't afford to make games alone," "we refuse to work in exploitative conditions again" - tend to hold together under that pressure. Studios built around a shared *aesthetic* preference for cooperation sometimes don't. Try to notice which one is yours.
 
-The industry tells us to brute force our way through these situations -- with the boss ultimately "resolving" the issue the way they want, probably guided by "move fast and figure it out later." But cooperative work requires something different. What Indigenous organizer Ruth Łchav'aya K'isen Miller calls "patience for the pace of trust."
+The industry tells us to brute force our way through these situations – with the boss ultimately "resolving" the issue the way they want, probably guided by "move fast and figure it out later." But cooperative work requires something different. What Indigenous organizer Ruth Łchav'aya K'isen Miller calls "patience for the pace of trust."
 
 Next session, we'll explore what it actually takes to align with collaborators beyond just sharing values on a Miro board. Even the closest friends can discover they have very different expectations about work, money, and decision-making when those conversations inevitably come up.
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 2 – Shared Purpose and Alignment.md

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ There is no set pace or speed at which this work should happen. Resisting extern
 
 The industry normalizes crunch, exploitation, and toxic competition as "just how games are made." These practices are in perfect opposition to those that ensure the stability and long-term sustainability of a studio. They are also the main failure point of the industry, destroying amazing teams and causing a ripple effect of harm.
 
-Many indies assume that because they are friends (or share political values) that they'll naturally work well together. But being pals and being aligned politically does not mean you share **work** values,**decision-making** styles, or**financial** expectations. Without putting intentional time and effort into alignment, even the closest relationships can crumble when those difficult conversations inevitably come up.
+Many indies assume that because they are friends (or share political values) that they'll naturally work well together. But being pals and being aligned politically does not mean you share **work** values, **decision-making** styles, or **financial** expectations. Without putting intentional time and effort into alignment, even the closest relationships can crumble when those difficult conversations inevitably come up.
 
 In a cooperative, instead of a boss solving problems through their authority, democracy becomes everyone's responsibility. Liberating? Terrifying? Yes. Why? Because *most of us were never taught the skills required to work collectively.*
 
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ Once you start to do this work, you may realize you are not as aligned as you th
 
 #### Alignment != agreement
 
-**Alignment** - Shared understanding of direction,*even with different motivations*
+**Alignment** - Shared understanding of direction, *even with different motivations*
 
 **False consensus** - Agreeing to avoid conflict (recipe for resentment)
 
@@ -85,11 +85,11 @@ Today we'll practice three core conversations…
 
 *Adapted from "The Talk: A Tool for Putting Values and Real Lives at the Forefront of Work" by Deen Rawlins (Obvious Agency), with modifications by Daniel Park*
 
-In your studio channels, with your Peer Support, practice these conversations. You prepped for this in your Session 1 homework, so now you're sharing with your team.
+In your studio channels, with your Peer Support, practice these conversations.
 
 ### Facilitation setup
 
-You've each thought about these questions individually. Now you're sharing with your team. The goal isn't to solve everything today - it's to get the conversation started. You'll keep picking up these threads in your Peer Support sessions.
+You've each thought about these questions individually (Session 1 homework). Now you're sharing with your team. The goal isn't to solve everything today - it's to get the conversation started. You'll keep picking up these threads in your Peer Support sessions.
 
 - When someone is speaking, listen. Hold responses until discussion time.  
 - There are no wrong answers  
@@ -152,9 +152,7 @@ You won't come to a conclusion today. You'll have a chance to talk about these t
 
 What surprised you? Where did you notice alignment? Where did you notice difference/divergence?
 
-Then close with:
-
-You probably noticed that a lot came up - and that's okay! We're going to keep talking about each of these areas as we go. All we did today is get the convo going. There's lots more work to do.
+You probably noticed that a lot came up – and that's okay! We're going to keep talking about each of these areas as we go. All we did today is get the convo going. There's lots more work to do.
 
 Remember: success for your studio is defined by your needs and values, not the industry's.
 
@@ -172,7 +170,7 @@ Next session, we'll take the values you've identified and turn principles into p
 
 ---
 
-## Homework (with Peer Supports)
+## Homework
 
 1. **Continue "The Talk" in your PS session** – Go deeper on whichever round brought up the most tension or uncertainty.
 
@@ -187,7 +185,7 @@ Next session, we'll take the values you've identified and turn principles into p
 
    Then ground it in reality: who are your players? (Do you know?) What's your revenue model? (Game sales? Services? Grants? Mix?) Can this sustain you? For how long?
 
-   We're not here to kill dreams. Just like any business, a cooperative needs a viable revenue plan. A studio that can't sustain its members isn't sustainable, no matter how good the values are.
+   We're not here to kill dreams. Just like any business, a cooperative needs a viable revenue plan. A studio that is not economically viable isn't sustainable, no matter how good the values are. Because if you don't have that, you don't have anything else.
 
    Bring your notes to your PS session. You'll use these as a starting point for ongoing conversations about shared language and alignment around scale, pace, and what success looks like for your studio.
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 3 – Actionable Values and Impact.md

@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
 # Session 3: Actionable Values and Impact
 
-## Pre-session
-
-Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 3** for pre-session tasks.
+*Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 3** for pre-session tasks.*
 
 ---
 
@@ -14,7 +12,7 @@ Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 3** for pre-session tasks.
 
 ## Intro - 3 min
 
-Over the last two sessions, we've covered **WHY** cooperatives matter to game developers who are challenging toxic industry norms,**WHAT** we want to build through shared purpose and values, and now we will dive into the**HOW**: The day-to-day tools you need to make democratic work... work! These tools are*technologies for liberation*, and every small step we take toward collectivism matters.
+Over the last two sessions, we've covered **WHY** cooperatives matter to game developers who are challenging toxic industry norms, **WHAT** we want to build through shared purpose and values, and now we will dive into the **HOW**: The day-to-day tools you need to make democratic work... work! These tools are *technologies for liberation*, and every small step we take toward collectivism matters.
 
 You've identified your values (Session 1) and started aligning with your collaborators (Session 2). But values on paper (or in your Miro board) don't prevent burnout or resolve conflict. This session introduces two tools to make values operational. Something you can return to when decisions get hard.
 
@@ -36,10 +34,6 @@ Last session you practiced The Talk and worked on scale and pace definitions wit
 
 ### Case study from PS Presenter - 10 min
 
-- how they arrived at their current values  
-- what changed through iteration  
-- one example of values guiding a real decision  
-- show the mess!
 
 ---
 
@@ -51,7 +45,7 @@ So let's practice. We'll give you two scenarios. *Start with your values before
 
 **Scenario 2:** A high-profile client who is legit and proven to have the funding wants to commission you to make art for them using generative AI. Your studio is at an early stage where getting clients at all is challenging. What do you do?
 
-*Give groups 3–4 minutes per scenario. Remind them: start with your values before you jump to the solution. Brief sharing around the room — what values came up? How did they shape the conversation?*
+*Take 3–4 minutes to discuss each scenario. Remind them: Start with your values before you jump to the solution. What values came up? How did they shape the conversation?*
 
 ---
 
@@ -61,7 +55,7 @@ You've identified values. You've had hard conversations about alignment. But how
 
 Values that live only in a document or a Miro board don't prevent burnout, resolve conflict, or guide decisions under pressure. The gap between "we value transparency" and *actually practicing* transparency is where most studios struggle.
 
-They also don't hold your studio together when someone asks "why are we even doing this?" In a Ghost Guild session after the program, we will work on public narrative - the practice of telling the story of why your studio exists in a way that actually moves people. For now, just notice: when you're working through Why/What/How, your "Why" is the beginning of that story. Hold tight to it!
+They also don't hold your studio together when someone asks "why are we even doing this?" In a Ghost Guild session after the program, we will work on public narrative - the practice of telling the story of why your studio exists in a way that actually moves people. For now, just notice: When you're working through Why/What/How, your "Why" is the beginning of that story. Hold tight to it!
 
 This section introduces two tools to close that gap:
 
@@ -80,6 +74,8 @@ Both tools give you something to return to when decisions get hard, when you're
 
 #### Using the framework
 
+**First, identify the problem, decision, activity to analyse.**
+
 The *order matters*: Why, then What, then How. And your values should guide all three levels.
 
 **WHY** - Why does this value matter to us? What's at stake? Example: "We value transparency because secrecy entrenches power and excludes people from decisions that affect them."
@@ -104,7 +100,7 @@ The second tool helps you see impact before (and after) you act.
 
 The framework uses three concentric rings:
 
-**Primary Effects** (centre ring) These are the*fundamental intentions* behind your activity - the direct, immediate impacts you're trying to create. For instance, a cooperative might focus on equitable profit sharing among all members, or prioritize sustainable and fair labour practices.
+**Primary Effects** (centre ring) These are the *fundamental intentions* behind your activity - the direct, immediate impacts you're trying to create. For instance, a cooperative might focus on equitable profit sharing among all members, or prioritize sustainable and fair labour practices.
 
 *Questions to ask:*
 
@@ -113,7 +109,7 @@ The framework uses three concentric rings:
 - What vulnerabilities are we creating?  
 - What breaks immediately?
 
-**Secondary Effects** (middle ring) These are*known but perhaps not immediately obvious* impacts. An example could be the cooperative's influence on promoting diversity and inclusion in the games industry, or its role in advocating for mental health awareness through its games and community interactions.
+**Secondary Effects** (middle ring) These are *known but perhaps not immediately obvious* impacts. An example could be the cooperative's influence on promoting diversity and inclusion in the games industry, or its role in advocating for mental health awareness through its games and community interactions.
 
 *Questions to ask:*
 
@@ -122,7 +118,7 @@ The framework uses three concentric rings:
 - Who bears the burden of adaptation?  
 - What erodes over months?
 
-**Tertiary Effects** (outer ring) These involve*unforeseen consequences* that arise from your activities. This might include setting new industry standards for ethical game development, or inadvertently creating a platform for global collaboration and cultural exchange among developers and players.
+**Tertiary Effects** (outer ring) These involve *unforeseen consequences* that arise from your activities. This might include setting new industry standards for ethical game development, or inadvertently creating a platform for global collaboration and cultural exchange among developers and players.
 
 *Questions to ask:*
 
@@ -189,7 +185,7 @@ We've covered a lot of topics here, but they are all centred around the goal of
 
 ---
 
-## Homework (with Peer Supports)
+## Homework
 
 1. **Apply Layers of Effect to an upcoming decision** – Use the Miro template on your studio board. Walk through: what are the primary, secondary, and tertiary effects? Who gains, who pays, who's invisible but affected?
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 4 – Decision-Making in Practice.md

@@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
 # Session 4: Decision-Making in Practice
 
-*practicing collective decision-making and noticing current patterns*
 
 ## Welcome
 
@@ -45,7 +44,7 @@ Where do cooperative decision-making opportunities come from? From members raisi
 
 - Proposals  
     - *I think we should do X. Here's why and how. What does everyone think?*  
-- Check-ins -  
+- Check-ins
     - *How is everyone feeling about Y? Should we address this formally?*  
 - Process intervention  
     - *Can we try a different approach?*  
@@ -69,7 +68,7 @@ Studios should do a periodic check-in to assess how they are doing around inform
 
 **Whose idea did we go with by default?** This reveals deference patterns - whose suggestions get adopted without much scrutiny.
 
-**Who knows how to do [X] that no one else knows?** This reveals knowledge concentration - where expertise creates dependency.
+**Who knows how to do *X* that no one else knows?** This reveals knowledge concentration - where expertise creates dependency.
 
 **What happened last time someone disagreed?** This reveals dissent tolerance - whether pushback is welcomed or punished.
 
@@ -98,7 +97,7 @@ Whatever framework you use, cooperative decision-making involves choosing betwee
 
 ### Handling dissent - 5 min
 
-When someone raises a concern late in the process, don't get frustrated that they are slowing the process down. *This is**super valuable** information!* Thank them for speaking up! It's not an easy thing to do, even for a contrarian (well, maybe).
+When someone raises a concern late in the process, don't get frustrated that they are slowing the process down. *This is **super valuable** information!* Thank them for speaking up! It's not an easy thing to do, even for a contrarian (well, maybe).
 
 Then consider: Is this a clarification or modification that can be addressed quickly? Or does it point to something more fundamental that means the group isn't ready to decide? If the concern is substantial, revisit earlier steps (especially 2, 3, or 5).
 
@@ -106,7 +105,7 @@ Watch for language like "I guess I can live with it" or "I don't want to hold ev
 
 ---
 
-## Frameworks - 25 min
+## Frameworks - 14 min
 
 Different decisions call for different approaches. Here are five common frameworks:
 
@@ -114,9 +113,7 @@ Different decisions call for different approaches. Here are five common framewor
 
 Everyone agrees that the selected option is the right option. Members can block a decision if it is not their top choice (even if they'd be ok with it).
 
-"It's important to remember that **no decision-making structure can prevent all conflict or power dynamics, or guarantee that we will never be frustrated or bored or decide to part ways.** But consensus decision-making at least helps us avoid the worst costs of hierarchies and majority rules, which can include abuse of power, demobilization of most people, and inefficiency.**Consensus decision-making** gives us the best chance to hear from everyone concerned, address power dynamics, and make decisions that represent the best wisdom of the group and that people in the group will want to implement."
-
-- Dean Spade, [*Mutual Aid: Building Solidarity During This Crisis (and the Next)*](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/dean-spade-mutual-aid#toc14)
+"It's important to remember that **no decision-making structure can prevent all conflict or power dynamics, or guarantee that we will never be frustrated or bored or decide to part ways.** But consensus decision-making at least helps us avoid the worst costs of hierarchies and majority rules, which can include abuse of power, demobilization of most people, and inefficiency. **Consensus decision-making** gives us the best chance to hear from everyone concerned, address power dynamics, and make decisions that represent the best wisdom of the group and that people in the group will want to implement." – Dean Spade, [*Mutual Aid: Building Solidarity During This Crisis (and the Next)*](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/dean-spade-mutual-aid#toc14)
 
 Consensus decision-making is the most effective way to make important decisions with small groups. The process requires direct participation and active listening from all involved and, when well facilitated, leads to better decisions and stronger commitment.
 
@@ -162,9 +159,9 @@ Consent helps us find an option that everyone is okay with, even if it's not the
 
 The question in consent is: "Is this good enough for now, safe enough to try?"
 
-This is different from consensus. In consensus, everyone must actively agree that the decision is the right choice. In consent, the bar is lower: no one has a paramount objection. You're asking "Can you live with this? Does it violate your values or cause harm you can't accept?" rather than "Do you love this?".
+This is different from consensus. In consensus, everyone must actively agree that the decision is the right choice. In consent, the bar is lower: No one has a paramount objection. You're asking "Can you live with this? Does it violate your values or cause harm you can't accept?" rather than "Do you love this?"
 
-Consent also protects against the opposite problem: rigidity. When a group treats past decisions as permanent - "but we already agreed to make an RPG" - it can become impossible to adapt when things change. Consent-based decisions are explicitly *revisitable*. The question isn't just "can you live with this?" but also "can you live with this*for now*, knowing we'll check back?" If someone is blocking a revisit of an old decision, that's worth examining - are they protecting a genuine value, or has the original decision become an identity they can't let go of?
+Consent also protects against the opposite problem: Rigidity. When a group treats past decisions as permanent – "but we already agreed to make an RPG" – it can become impossible to adapt when things change. Consent-based decisions are explicitly *revisitable*. The question isn't just "can you live with this?" but also "can you live with this *for now*, knowing we'll check back?" If someone is blocking a revisit of an old decision, that's worth examining – are they protecting a genuine value, or has the original decision become an identity they can't let go of?
 
 Sociocracy is one approach to this. Sociocratic organizations use a peer governance system based on consent, where work is organized into semiautonomous small groups, known as circles. Sociocracy has a very specific formal structure for consent decision-making. We'll link to its process so you can check it out.
 
@@ -174,21 +171,15 @@ Consent makes room for experimentation. If a decision doesn't work, you can alwa
 
 ---
 
-### Majority/democratic - 2 min
+### Other frameworks - 2 min
 
-Each member votes, and the option with the most votes wins. This could be a simple majority (51%), or a different ratio such as two-thirds.
+**Majority/democratic:** Each member votes, and the option with the most votes wins (simple majority, two-thirds, etc.). If your group uses formal voting, consider Democratic Rules of Order over Robert's Rules – same structure (chair, agenda, motions, votes) but without the procedural layers that create knowledge asymmetry and can be exploited as a power dynamic. Robert's Rules are arcane, parliamentary, and not appropriate for democratic organizations. Steer clear!
 
----
+**Delegation:** The member with the most expertise makes the decision – but how is this person determined? Through a decision!
 
-### Delegation - 2 min
+**Random chance:** When no one wants to decide, use a tool that generates a random yea or nay. A dice roll, coin flip – something like that.
 
-The member with the most expertise makes the decision. How is this person determined? Through a decision! ;)
 
----
-
-### Random chance/coin flip - 2 min
-
-So... no one wants to decide. Use a tool that generates a random(ish) yea or nay.
 
 ---
 
@@ -213,14 +204,16 @@ Meeting roles shouldn't be static. When the same person always facilitates, thei
 
 #### Facilitator
 
-Guides the conversation and keeps things on track. The facilitator's job is to *help the group's wisdom emerge* rather than act as an expert on the topics. They should self-moderate their own input and be especially conscious of not being the strongest voice. They also pay attention to group dynamics -- such as, who hasn't spoken? Is someone checked out? Is tension building? (Some folks break this last responsibility into a*process/vibes observer* role, which may be especially helpful when trying out new decision-making methods.)
+Guides the conversation and keeps things on track. The facilitator's job is to *help the group's wisdom emerge* rather than act as an expert on the topics. They should self-moderate their own input and be especially conscious of not being the strongest voice. 
+
+They also pay attention to group dynamics – such as, who hasn't spoken? Is someone checked out? Is tension building? (Some folks break this last responsibility into a*process/vibes observer* role, which may be especially helpful when trying out new decision-making methods.)
 
 **Tips:**
 
 - Before opening the floor, you can provide some quiet time for participants to write their thoughts down first  
-- Using "popcorn" style means anyone can jump in to share without a formal queue. Avoid selecting people to speak randomly - this can be stressful for those who do not wish to be called on. If multiple people indicate they want to speak, keep track of the queue and update the group.  
+- Using "popcorn" style means anyone can jump in to share without a formal queue. Avoid selecting people to speak randomly – this can be stressful for those who do not wish to be called on. If multiple people indicate they want to speak, keep track of the queue and update the group.  
 - Share the floor. The facilitator makes sure that everyone gets heard and included, and no one dominates the discussion. They might intervene: "Jennie, we've heard a lot from you and I want to give some others a chance to share their perspectives."  
-- Provide regular process updates - that is, say what you're doing: "I'm going to take a few ideas, then we'll discuss"  
+- Provide regular process updates – that is, say what you're doing: "I'm going to take a few ideas, then we'll discuss"  
 - Listen actively and deeply  
 - Reflect back ideas that are shared and check with the speaker that you understand. This is an opportunity to synthesize what you just heard with the wider conversation to help everyone's understanding.  
 - Put ideas for later in the parking lot  
@@ -228,18 +221,18 @@ Guides the conversation and keeps things on track. The facilitator's job is to *
 - Check in with energy levels, especially when you see people are flagging. A 5- or 10-minute break might help perk everyone up to continue.  
 - Have prompts on hand if things go awry:  
     - "I am noticing the tension. Should we pause and address that first?"  
-    - "I feel like we're going in circles/getting stuck - let's try a different approach."  
+    - "I feel like we're going in circles/getting stuck – let's try a different approach."  
     - "Let's pause for a moment and look at our process."
 
 #### Notetaker/minutes goblin
 
-Captures attendance, most important points, decisions made, and action items. Good notes include *who decided what* and*why*, not just discussion summaries. This creates accountability that doesn't depend on memory.
+Captures attendance, most important points, decisions made, and action items. Good notes include *who decided what* and *why*, not just discussion summaries. This creates accountability that doesn't depend on memory.
 
-#### Timekeeper
+#### Timekeeper/time baby
 
 Tracks time for each agenda item and gives warnings when time is running low. Helps the group decide whether to extend, table, or wrap up.
 
-Not every meeting needs all four roles, but rotating whatever roles you use prevents one person from becoming the de facto leader.
+Not every meeting needs all three roles, but rotating whatever roles you use prevents one person from becoming the de facto leader.
 
 ---
 
@@ -320,17 +313,17 @@ Rotate roles every 3 minutes.
 
 ## Closing - 2 min
 
-You've practiced frameworks and started noticing patterns - who speaks, who defers, whose defaults became the group's. These patterns *are* your governance, whether you've named it or not.
+You've practiced frameworks and started noticing patterns – who speaks, who defers, whose defaults became the group's. These patterns *are* your governance, whether you've named it or not.
 
-Next session, we'll look at formal structures: how do you design governance that supports the decision-making practices you want and addresses the dynamics you noticed?
+Next session, we'll look at formal structures: How do you design governance that supports the decision-making practices you want and addresses the dynamics you noticed?
 
 ---
 
-## Homework (with Peer Supports) - 3 min
+## Homework - 3 min
 
 1. **Practice one decision-making framework on a real decision** – Try consent or consensus on something that actually matters, even if it's small.
 
-2. **Map your current role distribution** – Where did each role assignment come from: explicit decision, or implicit default?
+2. **Map your current role distribution** – Where did each role assignment come from: Explicit decision, or implicit default?
 
 3. **Complete the Informal Hierarchy Check-In as a studio** – Work through the 5 questions together. Bring your observations to Session 5.
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 5 – Coop Structures and Governance.md

@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
 # Session 5: Coop Structures and Governance
 
-## Pre-session
-
-Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 5** for pre-session tasks.
+*Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 5** for pre-session tasks.*
 
 ---
 
@@ -49,7 +47,7 @@ Three things:
 
 ### The practical difference
 
-In a corporation, if you and two friends start a studio and one person puts in more money, they might own 60% and control major decisions. If you hire employees later, they're workers - not owners. If you sell the company, the original shareholders profit.
+In a corporation, if you and two friends start a studio and one person puts in more money, they might own 60% and control major decisions. If you hire employees later, they're workers – not owners. If you sell the company, the original shareholders profit.
 
 In a worker co-op, every worker-owner has equal (or near-equal) say regardless of when they joined or how much they invested. If someone leaves, they don't keep ownership. New members buy in and become full owners.
 
@@ -63,7 +61,13 @@ Incorporation creates:
 - Access to certain funding and tax benefits (e.g., OIDMTC in Ontario)  
 - An entity that can hold contracts, own IP, and survive individual members leaving
 
-But you can practice cooperative governance *before* you incorporate. The patterns you establish now. How you make decisions, how you handle money, how you share power will shape what kind of coop you become.
+Incorporation is not hard or expensive – which makes it tempting to treat as a milestone before the real work is done. But groups that rush to incorporate often find themselves still at step one two or three years later, because the relational and governance groundwork wasn't there yet.
+
+A few things worth knowing early: the Cooperative Corporations Act already covers a lot of ground. You don't need to replicate what the Act handles in your articles of incorporation, and over-specifying your objects or share structure in an attempt to "maintain control" is usually counterproductive – flexibility serves the co-op better as it evolves. Bylaws matter, but they're not the most important thing. Economic viability is. Spending too much time wordsmithing your bylaws is a distraction from the harder work of building sustainability.
+
+One more thing: Your legal advisors may not have co-op experience. Lawyers tend to default to conventional corporate structures, so seek out advisors who understand cooperative law, or at minimum, bring your own informed questions.
+
+The patterns you establish now – how you make decisions, how you handle money, how you share power – will shape what kind of co-op you become.
 
 ***Today's focus: Governance practice, not legal paperwork.***
 
@@ -84,24 +88,25 @@ The informal hierarchy check-in revealed patterns, right?
 
 Those patterns aren't problems yet. But under pressure informal patterns become cracks.
 
-Think: a funding deadline, a team member's life change, a game that's not working
+Think: A funding deadline, a team member's life change, a game that's not working
 
 OK, we'll say it again: *Studios don't fail because of creative differences. They fail because of governance, conflict resolution, and communication misalignment.* The game was good. The team couldn't hold together long enough to ship it.
 
 You've already been practicing governance:
 
 - have you deferred a preference (e.g., working odd hours) to fit with the group?  
-- have decisions been made in DMs  
+- have decisions been made in DMs?
 - does one person hold knowledge others don't?
 
 Will you choose your governance structure together or let it emerge by default?
 
-You might think of governance as bureaucracy. But it's quite the opposite: It's making the invisible visible and the accidental intentional. It's building structures that enact your values so you have a clear path through the hard times.
+You might think of governance as bureaucracy. But it's quite the opposite: It's making the invisible visible, the accidental intentional, the implicit explicit. It's building structures that enact your values so you have a clear path through the hard times.
 
-Not everyone in your studio needs to be a co-op nerd for your co-op to work. What matters is that your governance documents *encode your values into systems*. If your bylaws require transparent finances, transparency happens whether or not every member has internalized why it matters. If your decision-making process requires consent, no one can override the group even on a bad day. The documents you write this week are how your values work almost automatically even when people are tired and stressed.
+Not everyone in your studio needs to be a co-op nerd for your co-op to work. What matters is that your governance documents *encode your values into systems*. If your bylaws require transparent finances, transparency happens whether or not every member has internalized why it matters. If your decision-making process requires consent, no one can override the group even on a bad day. The documents you write this week are how your values work *almost automatically* even when people are tired and stressed.
 
 We want you to start making deliberate choices about how you'll work together, knowing you can revise as you learn.
 
+---
 ## Case Study: Presenter's governance journey - 15 min
 
 ---
@@ -162,7 +167,7 @@ Developed by Guerrilla Media Collective. "Distributed" means distributed geograp
 
 Gamma Space uses an adapted version of this model!
 
-- Value tracking across work types - distinguishes between *productive work* (the game),*care work* (team wellbeing), and*love work* (community, movement-building)  
+- Value tracking across work types - distinguishes between *productive work* (the game),*care work* (team wellbeing), and *love work* (community, movement-building)  
 - Uses contributory accounting so invisible labour becomes visible and compensated  
 - Challenges assumptions about what counts as "real" work  
 - Federation over scaling - small nodes (max 15-20 people) federate together rather than growing one large organization  
@@ -189,6 +194,8 @@ Whatever model you choose, clarify:
 
 This is often the hardest governance conversation. But you gotta have it before you need it.
 
+*Pre-formation studios often assume the original founders are permanent. But your governance should apply to everyone equally.*
+
 Adding members:
 
 - what's the process? who decides?  
@@ -208,21 +215,19 @@ Involuntary removal:
 
 #### Make accountability worth it
 
-If owning up to harm in your studio means losing everything - your community, your friends, your credibility, your income, your creative home - nobody will do it. They'll do anything to avoid that. You could end up spending months in a slow-motion crisis with no path out of it.
+If owning up to harm in your studio means losing everything – your community, your friends, your credibility, your income, your creative home – nobody will do it. They'll do anything to avoid that. You could end up spending months in a slow-motion crisis with no path out of it.
 
 When you're designing your conflict and removal policies, ask: Is it more worth it for someone to admit what they did than to lie about it? Is there a path back? Real consequences, real change required - but a path. If the only outcome of honesty is exile, you'll inevitably get dishonesty.
 
 This doesn't mean tolerating ongoing harm. Your process should distinguish between someone who is genuinely working to change and someone who is performing accountability while continuing the behaviour. The former needs support and real consequences; the latter needs a different response.
 
-Pre-formation studios often assume the original founders are permanent. But your governance should apply to everyone equally.
-
 #### The complexity of removing someone you care about
 
 The person you're removing is probably someone you care about. They're your collaborator and maybe your friend. The instinct to paint them as an irredeemable villain or monster makes the decision easier, but it's dishonest and in itself harmful to everyone. People who cause harm in your studio are human beings in your community - and yes, they hurt others, and that needs to be addressed. Holding both the care and the harm is one of the hardest tasks in cooperative work. Make room for that complexity rather than forcing everyone into a binary of good/bad.
 
 The person being removed may also be someone whose invisible labour has held things together. Community organizers, founders, people who did the unglamorous work of keeping things going when resources were scant - their contributions become very visible in their absence. A removal process that severs someone completely, without dialogue and without acknowledging what they built, both harms that person and damages the collective's relationship with its own history. Someone can take accountability for harm while the group still recognizes what they contributed. These ideas are both part of the truth and enable repair.
 
-Exile - total severance from community, communication, and support networks - is one of the most punishing things a group can do to a person, and it should be treated with that weight. If your removal process looks like excommunication, ask whether that's proportionate, whether it's actually serving the safety of the group, or whether it's being driven by urgency, fear, or the desire to make a painful situation disappear quickly. A process that centres care means making those decisions with enough deliberation, transparency, and humanity that everyone involved - including the person being removed - can see that the process was trustworthy.
+Exile – total severance from community, communication, and support networks – is one of the most punishing things a group can do to a person, and it should be treated with that weight. If your removal process looks like excommunication, ask whether that's proportionate, whether it's actually serving the safety of the group, or whether it's being driven by urgency, fear, or the desire to make a painful situation disappear quickly. A process that centres care means making those decisions with enough deliberation, transparency, and humanity that everyone involved - including the person being removed - can see that the process was trustworthy.
 
 *you don't need to finalize these policies now. but you should know where your group is easily aligned vs. where you'll need more conversation.*
 
@@ -273,13 +278,13 @@ Use these questions to connect your observations to design choices:
 
 The patterns you noticed aren't problems to fix!
 
-they're information for design. Your governance should make the invisible visible and the accidental… intentional!
+They're information for design. Your governance should make the invisible visible and the accidental… intentional!
 
 ---
 
 ## Tool: Community Rule - 10 min
 
-[Community Rule](https://communityrule.info/) is a tool for documenting governance structures in plain language. We'll walk through the interface and show you an example from [TODO-01: add Community Rule example].
+[Community Rule](https://communityrule.info/) is a tool for documenting governance structures in plain language. We'll walk through the interface and show you an example from Gamma Space.
 
 Start drafting with your Peer Support this week, taking note of what fields the tool asks for and where you already have answers vs. where you need to chat more.
 
@@ -289,13 +294,13 @@ Start drafting with your Peer Support this week, taking note of what fields the
 
 You've drafted a governance structure based on what you've learned about your decision-making patterns. But governance doesn't exist in a vacuum. It shapes (and is shaped by) how you handle money.
 
-Next session, we'll dig into equitable economics: transparent finances, compensation models, and profit-sharing. The governance you've designed will help you make those financial decisions together.
+Next session, we'll dig into equitable economics: Transparent finances, compensation models, and profit-sharing. The governance you've designed will help you make those financial decisions together.
 
 *Think about: What's one aspect of governance your team hasn't discussed yet?*
 
 ---
 
-## Homework (with Peer Supports)
+## Homework
 
 1. **Start your Community Rule draft** – During your PS session this week, use the tool to document what you've decided so far and where the gaps are. Bring questions to next session.
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 6 – Equitable Economics.md

@@ -1,18 +1,14 @@
 # Session 6: Equitable Economics
 
-## Pre-session
-
----
-
 ## Welcome
 
 Tag Yourself
 
 ---
 
-## Intro - 5 min
+## Intro – 5 min
 
-Last session you designed governance structures. Now we test them on the hardest topic: money.
+Last session you designed governance structures. Now we test them on the hardest topic: Money.
 
 In traditional studios, financial information is hoarded. If the boss says we can't afford raises, how do you know that's true if you don't have access to the books? If you've been the victim of the sudden shuttering of a studio, you probably didn't see it coming, because you never saw the real financial picture.
 
@@ -20,7 +16,7 @@ Secrecy entrenches power. In a cooperative, we have the opportunity to bust this
 
 ---
 
-## Check-in - 10 min
+## Check-in – 10 min
 
 Last session's homework asked you to discuss: *What does financial sustainability look like for you personally? What would you need from this project?*
 
@@ -30,7 +26,7 @@ Anyone want to share what came up in that conversation?
 
 ---
 
-## Part 1: Where money comes from - 15 min
+## Part 1: Where money comes from – 15 min
 
 We're going to talk about transparency and sharing in a bit. But we want to start with the good stuff!
 
@@ -40,27 +36,27 @@ Most sustainable studios don't rely on a single revenue stream.
 
 ### Member contributions
 
-- Member shares - equity buy-in when you join  
-- Member loans - members lending to the co-op, sometimes with interest  
-- Sweat equity - labour contributed before there's money to pay wages
+- Member shares – equity buy-in when you join  
+- Member loans – members lending to the co-op, sometimes with interest  
+- Sweat equity – labour contributed before there's money to pay wages
 
 ### Grants and public funding
 
-- Arts councils - Ontario Arts Council, Canada Council  
-- Industry programs - Ontario Creates, Canada Media Fund, etc.  
+- Arts councils – Ontario Arts Council, Canada Council  
+- Industry programs – Ontario Creates, Canada Media Fund, etc.  
 - Municipal and regional funds  
 - Project-specific grants
 
 ### Revenue from work
 
 - Publisher advances and deals  
-- Platform funding - Epic MegaGrants, id@XBOX etc.  
+- Platform funding – Epic MegaGrants, id@XBOX etc.  
 - Client work and contracts  
 - Direct sales  
 - Crowdfunding  
-- Service/contract work - porting, QA, art assets, sound design for other studios  
-- Adjacent creative work - animation, writing, interactive installations  
-- Knowledge work - workshops, speaking, consulting, teaching
+- Service/contract work – porting, QA, art assets, sound design for other studios  
+- Adjacent creative work – animation, writing, interactive installations  
+- Knowledge work – workshops, speaking, consulting, teaching
 
 ### Investment and loans
 
@@ -73,7 +69,7 @@ Most sustainable studios don't rely on a single revenue stream.
 
 This needs to be a collective and intentional decision. Developing and maintaining these streams require time and effort that can eat into your actual game development.
 
-*Coops have different capital options than traditional startups.* Venture capital doesn't work for us - VCs want big returns on their investment and eventually an "exit" (sale), which conflicts with worker ownership. On the other hand, we have access to funding streams that prioritize social impact over profit maximization.
+*Coops have different capital options than traditional startups.* Venture capital doesn't work for us – VCs want big returns on their investment and eventually an "exit" (sale), which conflicts with worker ownership. On the other hand, we have access to funding streams that prioritize social impact over profit maximization.
 
 Cooperation among cooperatives is one of the ICA cooperative principles we talked about a few weeks ago. When you do take on client or contract work, consider prioritizing work with other coops and solidarity economy organizations. This is a way we can build a "trade network" that helps everyone!
 
@@ -81,7 +77,7 @@ So think about: What funding sources has your studio used or considered? What fe
 
 ---
 
-## Part 2: Financial transparency - 15 min
+## Part 2: Financial transparency – 15 min
 
 ### Why transparency?
 
@@ -94,13 +90,13 @@ So think about: What funding sources has your studio used or considered? What fe
 - Share monthly financial summaries with all members  
 - Open-book policy (anyone can see the full accounts)  
 - Make all compensation transparent (everyone knows what everyone earns)  
-- Plan budgets collectively - this practice is sometimes called *participatory budgeting*, where members have real decision-making power over how money is allocated
+- Plan budgets collectively – this practice is sometimes called *participatory budgeting*, where members have real decision-making power over how money is allocated
 
 ### Tips for accessibility
 
-- Use plain language - not everyone speaks accounting.  
-- Summarize number-dense spreadsheets (we have 8 months of operating costs in the bank)  
-- Create space for questions. There are no embarrassing questions about money - most of us were never taught this stuff.  
+- Use plain language – not everyone speaks accounting.  
+- Summarize number-dense spreadsheets ("we have 8 months of operating costs in the bank")
+- Create space for questions. There are no embarrassing questions about money – most of us were never taught this stuff.
 - Visual dashboards can help. Tools like [CoBudget](https://cobudget.com/) or [OpenCollective](https://opencollective.com/) make finances visible, or even just a shared spreadsheet
 
 ### Tell the messy truth
@@ -109,15 +105,15 @@ Transparency isn't just internal. When you're doing public-facing work like crow
 
 ### Common resistance
 
-We have heard - what if competitors see our numbers?
+We have heard – what if competitors see our numbers?
 
-But for real - what's actually at risk versus what's just discomfort? Most studios aren't competing on secret financial information. Is this fear really about vulnerability?
+But for real – what's actually at risk versus what's just discomfort? Most studios aren't competing on secret financial information. Is this fear really about vulnerability?
 
-*Resource: [Seeds for Change - Finance](https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/finance)*
+*Resource: [Seeds for Change – Finance](https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/finance)*
 
 ---
 
-## Part 3: Compensation models - 20 min
+## Part 3: Compensation models – 20 min
 
 SO! How do cooperatives pay people? There's no single right answer, but whatever you choose should be transparent and collectively decided.
 
@@ -144,7 +140,7 @@ SO! How do cooperatives pay people? There's no single right answer, but whatever
 
 Whatever model you choose, *think about: What do we collectively believe is fair, and can we talk openly about it?*
 
-### Activity - 10 min
+### Activity – 10 min
 
 In studio groups, discuss:
 
@@ -156,7 +152,7 @@ Share back with the group.
 
 ---
 
-## Part 4: Profit-sharing basics - 20 min
+## Part 4: Profit-sharing basics – 20 min
 
 ### What is profit-sharing in a coop?
 
@@ -166,7 +162,7 @@ When the cooperative has surplus (revenue beyond expenses), how does it get dist
 
 *Wages:* Payment for work performed. This is an expense, not profit-sharing.
 
-*Patronage returns (or "dividends"):* Distribution of surplus based on members' contribution to the coop - usually measured by hours worked. This is what makes coops different: surplus flows to the people who created it, not to outside investors.
+*Patronage returns (or "dividends"):* Distribution of surplus based on members' contribution to the coop – usually measured by hours worked. This is what makes coops different: surplus flows to the people who created it, not to outside investors.
 
 *Member shares:* Your equity stake in the coop. Usually a fixed amount you pay to join, returned when you leave.
 
@@ -181,7 +177,7 @@ When the cooperative has surplus (revenue beyond expenses), how does it get dist
 
 This is a *values* conversation!
 
-- Build a reserve first. How many months of runway do you want before distributing anything? - there's no right answer.  
+- Build a reserve first. How many months of runway do you want before distributing anything? – there's no right answer.  
 - Distribute when you have genuine surplus, not just a good month  
 - Decide collectively if you want cash now or investment in the studio's future?  
 - Some coops allocate a percentage of surplus to a "collective account" for shared needs
@@ -190,19 +186,19 @@ This is a *values* conversation!
 
 Cooperative legislation is provincial in Canada, so the rules depend on where you incorporate.
 
-*Ontario:* Worker coops can distribute patronage returns to members based on their labour contribution. There's flexibility in how you structure this - you decide the formula in your bylaws.
+*Ontario:* Worker coops can distribute patronage returns to members based on their labour contribution. There's flexibility in how you structure this – you decide the formula in your bylaws.
 
 *Federal:* You can also incorporate under the Canada Cooperatives Act, which has its own rules.
 
-However you structure it, patronage returns flow to workers based on their labour - not to outside shareholders based on their investment. This is the legal mechanism that grounds worker ownership.
+However you structure it, patronage returns flow to workers based on their labour – not to outside shareholders based on their investment. This is the legal mechanism that grounds worker ownership.
 
 ### Discussion
 
-questions about how this would work for your studio?
+Any questions about how this would work for your studio?
 
 ---
 
-## Part 5: Who owns what you make together? - 10 min
+## Part 5: Who owns what you make together? – 10 min
 
 We've talked about how surplus flows to members. Buuuut, before you can share surplus you need to decide *who owns* what you're creating together!
 
@@ -213,18 +209,18 @@ Cooperatives can do this differently with explicit decisions!
 ### Questions to discuss as a studio
 
 1. Who owns the game?  
-    - the cooperative as an entity? individual members jointly? a mix?  
-    - if the coop owns it, what happens to that ownership if someone leaves?  
+    – the cooperative as an entity? individual members jointly? a mix?  
+    – if the coop owns it, what happens to that ownership if someone leaves?  
 2. What about work created before the coop formed?  
-    - if someone brings existing assets, code, or designs into the project, do they retain individual ownership or contribute it to the collective?  
-    - how do you value those contributions?  
+    – if someone brings existing assets, code, or designs into the project, do they retain individual ownership or contribute it to the collective?  
+    – how do you value those contributions?  
 3. What happens if someone leaves mid-project?  
-    - do they retain any ownership stake in work they contributed to?  
-    - can they take "their" assets (character designs, code they wrote) with them?  
-    - what's the difference between leaving voluntarily vs. being asked to leave?  
+    – do they retain any ownership stake in work they contributed to?  
+    – can they take "their" assets (character designs, code they wrote) with them?  
+    – what's the difference between leaving voluntarily vs. being asked to leave?  
 4. What happens if the studio dissolves?  
-    - who controls the ip? can one member buy out others?  
-    - what if you can't agree?
+    – who controls the ip? can one member buy out others?  
+    – what if you can't agree?
 
 *Not deciding* means you're going to default to whatever legal structure you eventually incorporate under. Worst case scenario is realizing too late that everyone's expectations were mismatched.
 
@@ -234,11 +230,11 @@ If you haven't started selling your game yet and members are contributing labour
 
 "Sweat equity" is complicated. Some coops track hours and convert them to ownership stakes. Others treat all founding members as equal regardless of hours contributed. However you do it, everyone needs to understand and agree to the approach.
 
-*Use your Peer Support session to start this conversation. You don't need answers yet - just notice where you're in agreement and where you're uncertain.*
+*Use your Peer Support session to start this conversation. You don't need answers yet – just notice where you're in agreement and where you're uncertain.*
 
 ---
 
-## Closing - 5 min
+## Closing – 5 min
 
 Financial conversations can be really difficult. They reveal vulnerabilities, and tensions about values, fairness, and trust. There's so much space for conflict to show up here.
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 7 – Conflict Resolution and Collective Care.md

@@ -1,44 +1,40 @@
 # Session 7: Conflict Resolution and Collective Care
 
-## Pre-session
-
-Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 7** for pre-session tasks.
+*Peer Supports: See **PS Guide: Session 7** for pre-session tasks.*
 
 ---
 
-## Intro - 5 min
+## Intro – 5 min
 
-Last session we tackled the hardest topic: money. Financial conversations are often where conflict first shows up in a studio. If your compensation discussion went smoothly, great. If it got tense, that's not failure. That's information.
+Last session we tackled the hardest topic: money. Financial conversations are often where conflict first shows up in a studio. If your compensation discussion went smoothly, great. If it got tense, you now have more information about your teammates!
 
-We've been taught that conflict means something is wrong. But in healthy cooperatives, disagreement is *valuable data* - it tells us there's an opportunity to create something better for everyone.
+We've been taught that conflict means something is wrong. But in healthy cooperatives, disagreement is *valuable data* – it tells us there's an opportunity to create something better for everyone.
 
-Something to hold as we go through today: many of us show up to cooperative spaces already scanning for signs we don't belong. We arrive hopeful, and then feel let down when something isn't perfect. This is a pattern shaped by a lifetime of not feeling belonging. Knowing this, we can design our studios and our conversations with more care.
+Something to hold as we go through today: Many of us show up to cooperative spaces already scanning for signs we don't belong. We arrive hopeful, and then feel let down when something isn't perfect. This is a pattern shaped by a lifetime of not feeling belonging. Knowing this, we can design our studios and our conversations with more care.
 
-Cooperatives don't eliminate conflict: they harness it. Conflict signals where values misalign or needs aren't being met.
-
-*-- Samantha Slade, Going Horizontal*
+> Cooperatives don't eliminate conflict: they harness it. Conflict signals where values misalign or needs aren't being met. – Samantha Slade, *Going Horizontal*
 
 **Addressing conflict head-on is an act of care.** Avoidance lets harm fester.
 
 ---
 
-## Check-in - 5 min
+## Check-in – 5 min
 
 What came up in your compensation models discussion from last session? Where did you notice friction? Or surprised by alignment?
 
 ---
 
-## Part 1: Reframing conflict - 15 min
+## Part 1: Reframing conflict – 15 min
 
 ### Conflict as care
 
 - Disagreement is DATA, not failure  
-- Addressing issues directly is caring - avoidance lets harm fester  
+- Addressing issues directly is caring – avoidance lets harm fester  
 - Healthy teams have conflict; unhealthy teams suppress it
 
 People who avoid conflict aren't being cooperative. They are invisibilizing their pain. And people who escalate every disagreement into combat are treating conflict as threat rather than neutral signal.
 
-In community listening projects across Western North Carolina, Cooperate WNC found that the biggest impediment to the success of collective projects was conflict - even more than money. *Even more than money.*
+In community listening projects across Western North Carolina, Cooperate WNC found that the biggest impediment to the success of collective projects was conflict – even more than money. *Even more than money.*
 
 Unresolved conflict drives people out entirely. Most people who leave cooperative or movement work do so because they are in pain because of conflict that was never addressed. They joined work they cared about, something went wrong, and the resulting loss of trust is what actually burns them out.
 
@@ -50,9 +46,7 @@ Traditional corporations just want conflict to go away so they can get workers b
 
 But if we actually looked at the underlying sources of conflict, we'd have to acknowledge the systems that created it.
 
-A given **conflict is just a fruit on the tree of the underlying whole system** it came out of. Those root causes usually have to do with trauma, power structures, and the ways capitalism shapes our relationships. We don't want to just resolve conflicts and brush them under the rug. We want to see each one as a doorway into the underlying causes, so we can**transform them and create deeper trust** through the process.
-
--- *Zev Friedman, Cooperate Western NC*
+> "A given **conflict is just a fruit on the tree of the underlying whole system** it came out of. Those root causes usually have to do with trauma, power structures, and the ways capitalism shapes our relationships. We don't want to just resolve conflicts and brush them under the rug. We want to see each one as a doorway into the underlying causes, so we can**transform them and create deeper trust** through the process." – Zev Friedman, Cooperate Western NC
 
 ### Structural vs. interpersonal
 
@@ -62,50 +56,48 @@ A given **conflict is just a fruit on the tree of the underlying whole system**
 
 Many conflicts are both. The structural issue creates the conditions for interpersonal friction
 
-Fix the structure first - otherwise you're just managing symptoms.
+Fix the structure first – otherwise you're just managing symptoms.
 
 It's also useful to ask…
 
 - Is there a collective impact, or is it personal preference?  
-    - Helps determine urgency  
+    – Helps determine urgency  
 - Is the concern evidence-based or speculative?  
-    - Shapes how you will respond
+    – Shapes how you will respond
 
 Communication tools don't fix governance problems. If the structure is broken, no amount of "I statements" will help!
 
 #### Watch for the emotional-political conflation trap
 
-Before diagnosing a conflict as structural or interpersonal, check whether political language is standing in for emotional experience. We might be very good at naming the political or identity-based dimensions of a disagreement but much less practiced at naming the emotional dynamics underneath. When we're afraid or defensive, reaching for political framing can feel like solid ground - but it can also make repair harder.
+Before diagnosing a conflict as structural or interpersonal, check whether political language is standing in for emotional experience. We might be very good at naming the political or identity-based dimensions of a disagreement but much less practiced at naming the emotional dynamics underneath. When we're afraid or defensive, reaching for political framing can feel like solid ground – but it can also make repair harder.
 
 In your studio, someone might feel unheard in a creative decision and frame it as a power or equity issue. *Both might be true!* But if you skip the emotional reality and go straight to political framing, you make resolution harder. Try to name both.
 
 ### Some truths of conflict
 
 1. Just talking about conflict can create conflict.  
-2. Conflict takes time.  
+2. Working through conflict takes time. Sometimes *lots* of time.
 3. Conflict *will* happen. We promise. Even if you're best friends.
 
 ### Multi-directional accountability
 
-In cooperatives, accountability runs in multiple directions. Members are accountable to each other and to the collective - but the collective is also accountable to each member. This is different from traditional workplaces where accountability only flows upward to bosses.
+In cooperatives, accountability runs in multiple directions. Members are accountable to each other and to the collective – but the collective is also accountable to each member. This is different from traditional workplaces where accountability only flows upward to bosses.
 
-"Holding someone accountable" sounds like something that happens *to* a person who messed up. We all come together and make them answer for what they did. But you can't actually hold someone accountable. Accountability is a process someone*engages in by choice*.
+"Holding someone accountable" sounds like something that happens *to* a person who messed up. We all come together and make them answer for what they did. But you can't actually hold someone accountable. Accountability is a process someone *engages in by choice*.
 
 What you *can* do is create the conditions where accountability is possible. Can someone in your studio admit they messed up without it being a catastrophe? Is there enough trust that people will be honest about impact without it turning into a dehumanizing pile-on? Do people feel seen enough as real, full humans that they can hear hard feedback without shutting down or peacing out?
 
-One thing we've learned from community work is that accountability requires specificity. You can't take responsibility for unspecified offences - it's impossible to address "you caused harm" when no one will tell you what you did. Vague accusations invite shame, defensiveness, capitulation - and none of those are repair. If your studio's process asks someone to account for their behaviour, it needs to name - clearly and specifically - the behaviour being addressed.
+One thing we've learned from community work is that accountability requires specificity. You can't take responsibility for unspecified offences – it's impossible to address "you caused harm" when no one will tell you what you did. Vague accusations invite shame, defensiveness, capitulation – and none of those are repair. If your studio's process asks someone to account for their behaviour, it needs to name – clearly and specifically – the behaviour being addressed.
 
 The other thing is that your processes only work if people actually use them. Organizations can have beautiful conflict resolution policies on paper and then bypass them entirely when things get real. When that happens, the processes weren't truly aligned with the group's actual values. If you build accountability structures, commit to using them even (especially) when it's uncomfortable or inconvenient. An organization that abandons its own processes in a crisis is telling its members that those processes were never real.
 
-When we approach conflict as a structural condition, we can ask: What is our structure doing that's making this harder? What would need to change so people could actually be honest about the harm they've caused?
-
-When we approach conflict as a **movement condition** rather than an individual failing, we can ask: What is our structure doing that's making this harder? Rather than, Who is the problem?
+When we approach conflict as a structural/movement condition rather than an individual failing, the question shifts from _who is the problem?_ to _what is our structure doing that's making this harder?_ What would need to change so people could actually be honest about the harm they've caused?
 
 [*Solidarity Economy Principles*](https://solidarityeconomyprinciples.org/theme-collective-care-relationships-and-accountability/)
 
 ---
 
-## Part 2: Common Conflicts in Game Studios - 15 min
+## Part 2: Common Conflicts in Game Studios – 15 min
 
 **1. Workload and contribution**
 
@@ -145,9 +137,9 @@ Think back on the Informal Hierarchy Check-In from Session 4… those same ques
 - who gets deferred to?  
 - whose schedule shapes our meeting times?
 
-*Noticing is not accusing.* Pointing out "hey, we've defaulted to jennie's preferences three times now" isn't conflict. The goal is*noticing before patterns calcify*.
+*Noticing is not accusing.* Pointing out "hey, we've defaulted to jennie's preferences three times now" isn't conflict. The goal is *noticing before patterns calcify*.
 
-You can name power accumulation without it being a fight. If you can't - your coop might not have enough capacity for handling conflict.
+You can name power accumulation without it being a fight. If you can't – your coop might not have enough capacity for handling conflict.
 
 ### Discussion
 
@@ -155,11 +147,9 @@ You can name power accumulation without it being a fight. If you can't - your co
 
 ---
 
-## Part 3: Tools for Conflict - 25 min
+## Part 3: Tools for Conflict – 15 min
 
-"We live in a society based on **disposability**. When we feel bad, we often automatically decide that either we are bad or another person is bad. Both of these moves cause damage and distort the truth, which is that we are all navigating difficult conditions the best we can, and we all have a lot to learn and unlearn. If we want to build a different way of being together in groups,**we have to look closely at the feelings and behaviours that generate the desire to throw people away**. Humility, compassion for ourselves, and compassion for others are antidotes to disposability culture. Examining where we project on others and where we react strongly to others can give us more options when we are in conflict. Every one of us is more complex and beautiful than our worst actions and harshest judgements. Building compassion and accountability requires us to take stock of our own actions and reactions in conflict, and seek ways to treat each other with care even in the midst of strong feelings."
-
--- *Dean Spade, ["Practicing New Social Relations, Even in Conflict"](https://francesslee.medium.com/practicing-new-social-relations-even-in-conflict-dean-spade-54d4a60fcfed)*
+"We live in a society based on **disposability**. When we feel bad, we often automatically decide that either we are bad or another person is bad. Both of these moves cause damage and distort the truth, which is that we are all navigating difficult conditions the best we can, and we all have a lot to learn and unlearn. If we want to build a different way of being together in groups,**we have to look closely at the feelings and behaviours that generate the desire to throw people away**. Humility, compassion for ourselves, and compassion for others are antidotes to disposability culture. Examining where we project on others and where we react strongly to others can give us more options when we are in conflict. Every one of us is more complex and beautiful than our worst actions and harshest judgements. Building compassion and accountability requires us to take stock of our own actions and reactions in conflict, and seek ways to treat each other with care even in the midst of strong feelings." – Dean Spade, ["Practicing New Social Relations, Even in Conflict"](https://francesslee.medium.com/practicing-new-social-relations-even-in-conflict-dean-spade-54d4a60fcfed)
 
 ### Loving Justice framework
 
@@ -167,22 +157,20 @@ Before speaking, ask: Is it Brave? Kind? Honest? Humble?
 
 ### Feedback is a gift
 
-This sounds like a platitude, but it's a real shift. When someone gives you feedback, they're telling you *how to take better care of them* and how to make your system more functional. They're giving you information you didn't have.
+This sounds like a platitude, but it's a real perspective shift. When someone gives you feedback, they're telling you *how to take better care of them* and how to make your system more functional. They're giving you information you didn't have.
 
-The shift is from perceiving feedback as threat to perceiving feedback as power. It's hard - especially if your pattern is defensiveness. But people who stay in cooperative work long enough often describe a moment when this actually flipped for them.
-
--- *Zev Friedman, Cooperate Western NC*
+> "The shift is from perceiving feedback as threat to perceiving feedback as power. It's hard – especially if your pattern is defensiveness. But people who stay in cooperative work long enough often describe a moment when this actually flipped for them." – Zev Friedman, Cooperate Western NC
 
 ### Behaviourally-specific feedback
 
-Sometimes feedback comes in very ugly wrapping - that doesn't mean there's not a gift inside.
+Sometimes feedback comes in very ugly wrapping – that doesn't mean there's not a gift inside.
 
 [TODO-IMAGE-03: Intent/Behaviour/Impact illustration from Connect (Bradford & Robin) – recreate or source]
 
 When two people interact, there are three realities:
 
 1. Intent (Person 1's reality): Their needs, motives, emotions, intentions  
-2. Behaviour (Common reality): Tone, words, gestures, facial expressions - what actually happened  
+2. Behaviour (Common reality): Tone, words, gestures, facial expressions – what actually happened  
 3. Impact (Person 2's reality): Your reactions and emotions
 
 Each person can only know 2 of these realities. You know the behaviour you observed and the impact on you.
@@ -195,7 +183,7 @@ Stay on your side of the net. Moving beyond the 2 realities you understand makes
 
 #### What counts as behaviour?
 
-Behaviour is something you can point to - words, gestures, even silence. A useful test: *If people were shown a video of the interaction, would they agree they saw the same behaviours?*
+Behaviour is something you can point to – words, gestures, even silence. A useful test: *If people were shown a video of the interaction, would they agree they saw the same behaviours?*
 
 Be specific. "You dominated the discussion" is a judgment based on a series of behaviours. "You spoke for 10 of the 15 minutes" is observable. The more specific you are, the harder it is for the other person to deny.
 
@@ -207,13 +195,9 @@ Be specific. "You dominated the discussion" is a judgment based on a series of b
 4. All behaviourally specific feedback is **positive**  
     1. behaviour is something we can change  
     2. affirmative = “positive” and developmental = “negative”  
-5. All feedback is **data**, and more data is better than less.  
+5. All behaviourally-specific feedback is **data**, and more data is better than less.  
     1. Feedback given with the intention of being helpful is always positive
 
-**All behaviourally specific feedback is positive.**
-
-Not because it feels good, but because it's data. And more data is better than less. Feedback given with the intention of being helpful is always a gift, even when the wrapping is ugly.
-
 *Adapted from Connect: Building Exceptional Relationships with Family, Friends, and Colleagues by David Bradford Ph.D. and Carole Robin Ph.D.*
 
 ### Stay with your truth
@@ -224,30 +208,15 @@ What's the part of you that's saying "no"? That's pushing back? Can you speak fr
 
 Conflict is telling us if there is a problem or a need not being met. Hold onto that while holding onto someone else's truth.
 
-### Shame gets in the way
+### Before you raise an issue
 
-When someone is told they've caused harm, a common response is shame. It's a physiological response: you go inward, you lose the relational connection needed to actually hear the other person, and shut down. A performance of accountability - "I'm so sorry, I'm the worst, I'll do whatever you want" - is still centred on the person who caused harm, rather than attending to the impact on the other person.
+Two things to watch for: shame responses (collapsing into "I'm a terrible person" instead of attending to the other person's experience – name it when you see it), and clarity about what you actually observed vs. interpreted. Before starting a conversation, get clear on: what specific behaviour did I observe? What "no"s are coming up for me? What's my part in this? What do I actually need?
 
-When your body is in a shut-down shame state, you can't really take accountability. This is because it requires you to be grounded enough to *move toward* the person you've hurt: To listen, sit with discomfort, and take agency in changing your behaviour.
-
-Centring someone else changes how you give and receive feedback. If your response to "hey, that thing you did in the meeting hurt me" is to collapse into "I'm a terrible person," you've just made the other person take care of *your* feelings about*their* pain.
-
-A practical tip: Name the shame when you see it (in yourself or others). "I think I'm shame-spiralling right now" is an okay thing to say. It doesn't get you off the hook, but it allows your teammates to give you a beat so that you can actually ground yourself and focus on the conversation.
-
-> Adapted from *Building Accountable Communities*, a video series by Dean Spade, Mariame Kaba, and the Barnard Center for Research on Women (BCRW). [Building Accountable Communities](https://bcrw.barnard.edu/building-accountable-communities/)
-
-### Reflection before conversation
-
-Before you raise an issue, get clear on:
-
-1. what specific behaviour did i observe? (not feelings or interpretations)
-2. what "no"s are coming up for me?
-3. what's my part in this?
-4. what do i actually need?
+*For deeper reading on shame, accountability, and conflict: [Building Accountable Communities](https://bcrw.barnard.edu/building-accountable-communities/) – Dean Spade, Mariame Kaba, and BCRW.*
 
 ---
 
-## Part 4: Window of Transformation - 10 min
+## Part 4: Window of Transformation – 10 min
 
 Timing matters:
 
@@ -255,6 +224,8 @@ Is this person able to hear feedback right now? Are *you* able to give it?
 
 The "Window of Transformation" is an embodied conflict response model developed by Kai Cheng Thom, inspired by Dan Siegel and Pat Ogden's "Window of Tolerance." It maps different emotional states and responses to conflict based on nervous system activation.
 
+[TODO-03: Insert Window of Transformation graphic here after import]
+
 ### The zones
 
 **Destructive (High Activation)**
@@ -286,41 +257,39 @@ The "Window of Transformation" is an embodied conflict response model developed
 
 You're not going to be able to stay in the Window of Transformation permanently! Your goal is to *notice* when you've left it and make choices accordingly.
 
-if you're in the Destructive zone: this is not the time to have the conversation - step away. Take a break.
+if you're in the Destructive zone: this is not the time to have the conversation – step away. Take a break.
 
 if you're in the performative zone: you might agree to things you don't actually consent to
 
 if you're in fragile/collapse: you need support, not a conflict conversation.
 
-Practice noticing where others are. If someone is clearly activated or shut down - leave some space.
+Practice noticing where others are. If someone is clearly activated or shut down – leave some space.
 
-One thing that is surprising and challenging about the emotional dynamics of conflict is that we do the most harm to others when we are feeling aggrieved, victimized, left out, and/or resentful. It’s counterintuitive because those are the moments when we are focused on what others did wrong and how we are hurting. But those are the times we are most likely to do something harmful, like go and write the really messed up email to somebody, treat somebody with a cold shoulder, gossip negatively about people in our group or about another group in town, post a bunch of stuff on Instagram that’s really inflammatory, or violate someone’s privacy.
-
--- Dean Spade, "Navigating Conflict in Movement Spaces" (Nonprofit Quarterly)
+> "One thing that is surprising and challenging about the emotional dynamics of conflict is that we do the most harm to others when we are feeling aggrieved, victimized, left out, and/or resentful. It’s counterintuitive because those are the moments when we are focused on what others did wrong and how we are hurting. But those are the times we are most likely to do something harmful, like go and write the really messed up email to somebody, treat somebody with a cold shoulder, gossip negatively about people in our group or about another group in town, post a bunch of stuff on Instagram that’s really inflammatory, or violate someone’s privacy." – Dean Spade, "Navigating Conflict in Movement Spaces" (Nonprofit Quarterly)
 
 The moments you ***feel most justified*** are the moments you're most likely to cause harm. If you're feeling like the wronged party, that's exactly when to pause and ask a trusted person whether your planned response is the right scale.
 
 ---
 
-## Activity - 15 min
+## Activity – 10 min
 
-Offer studios an example scenario:
+Here are some example scenarios:
 
 - So-and-so keeps talking over me in meetings  
 - One person keeps having to answer emails and is left out of game dev chats  
-- Another *small* conflict. (Although conflict has a way of bubbling up).
+- Another *small* conflict. (Although conflict has a way of bubbling up and becoming giant).
 
 ### Discussion
 
 - is this structural, interpersonal, or both?  
-- using behaviourally-specific feedback: what would you actually say? (stay on your side of the net - what you observed, what impact it had)  
+- using behaviourally-specific feedback: what would you actually say? (stay on your side of the net – what you observed, what impact it had)  
 - apply the Loving Justice questions (Brave? Kind? Honest? Humble?)  
 - what would make this issue easier to raise?  
 - notice what zone you're in
 
 ---
 
-## Escalation as Care - 10 min
+## Escalation as Care – 10 min
 
 Escalation is NOT failure! it's recognizing that some conflicts *need more support* than a 1:1 can provide.
 
@@ -328,15 +297,15 @@ Escalation is NOT failure! it's recognizing that some conflicts *need more suppo
 
 #### Direct conversation
 
-Talk to the person yourself. Use the tools we just practiced - behaviourally specific feedback, staying on your side of the net, checking what zone you're in before you start.
+Talk to the person yourself. Use the tools we just practiced – behaviourally specific feedback, staying on your side of the net, checking what zone you're in before you start.
 
 #### Escalate bandwidth
 
-Escalate the bandwidth of the channel - if you’re on Slack asynchronous text, move to Slack synchronous text at a planned time. From synchronous chat to an audio Huddle, audio to video. *Credit: [Joshua Vial](https://joshuavial.com/loomio-conflict/)*
+Escalate the bandwidth of the channel – if you’re on Slack asynchronous text, move to Slack synchronous text at a planned time. From synchronous chat to an audio Huddle, audio to video. *Credit: [Joshua Vial](https://joshuavial.com/loomio-conflict/)*
 
 #### Bring in a third party
 
-a trusted person who can facilitate - not to judge or decide, but to help both people hear each other. This could be another studio member, a Peer Support, or someone outside the studio you both trust.
+a trusted person who can facilitate – not to judge or decide, but to help both people hear each other. This could be another studio member, a Peer Support, or someone outside the studio you both trust.
 
 #### Formal process
 
@@ -354,15 +323,11 @@ We'll share Baby Ghosts' conflict resolution policies and procedures as a templa
 
 ### Trust comes from repair, not avoidance
 
-[TODO-02: Clean up sourcing/attribution for this passage]
+The Gottman Institute found that couples don't build trust by avoiding conflict. They build trust by having conflict and then repairing. The repair is what demonstrates: You matter to me enough that you're worth repairing with. I'm going to do the work.
 
-The Gottman Institute found that couples don't build trust by avoiding conflict. They build trust by having conflict and then repairing. The repair is what demonstrates: you matter to me enough that you're worth repairing with. I'm going to do the work.
+The same is true in cooperative work. Being willing to risk rupture, and then showing up for repair – that's what creates the trust. "Oh, you really did have my back when it mattered. You really were willing to receive feedback."
 
-The same is true in cooperative work. Being willing to risk rupture, and then showing up for repair - that's what creates the trust. "Oh, you really did have my back when it mattered. You really were willing to receive feedback."
-
-People who stay put in conflict rather than run away are signalling they're ready for deeper work.
-
--- *Zev Friedman, Cooperate Western NC on John M. Gottman Ph.D., The Science of Trust*
+>"People who stay put in conflict rather than run away are signalling they're ready for deeper work." – *Zev Friedman, Cooperate Western NC on John M. Gottman Ph.D., The Science of Trust*
 
 ### Hot tips
 
@@ -377,7 +342,7 @@ Soul Fire Farm, an agricultural coop in New York, uses a peer-to-peer "Real Talk
 
 ---
 
-## Closing - 5 min
+## Closing – 5 min
 
 *"Deescalate all conflict that isn't with the enemy." -- Margaret Killjoy*
 
@@ -391,7 +356,7 @@ we'll step back and assess what you've created together. what's working/fragile/
 
 ---
 
-## Homework (with Peer Supports)
+## Homework
 
 1. **Name one avoided tension** – What conflict or tension has your studio been avoiding? It doesn't have to be big – small avoidances are good to examine too. What makes it tough to bring up? Can you practice raising it?
 

content/curriculum/Sessions/Session 8 – Self-Evaluation and Pathways.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ And then we'll celebrate as a group!
 
 ## Self-assessment overview - 5 min
 
-It's easy to get into a groove and forget to check in with yourself. But clarity of self-reflection makes you a better collaborator. Most of the work is making the time and space to sit with your thoughts before writing them down – that's what prevents decisions made in haste or fear and builds intentional practice instead.
+It's easy to get into a groove and forget to check in with yourself. But clarity of self-reflection makes you a better collaborator. Most of the work is making the time and space to sit with your thoughts before writing them down. That's what prevents decisions made in haste or fear and builds intentional practice instead.
 
 We have two assessments for you today. The first is personal and private – just for you. The second is collective – you'll complete it as a studio, and Baby Ghosts will review it to understand where you're at and how to support you going forward. This is also important feedback for us, so please be honest about what worked and what didn't.
 
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ We have two assessments for you today. The first is personal and private – jus
 
 This helps you get a clearer sense of your personal and professional baseline. Be on the same page with yourself before you meet with your team. Where have you grown? Where do you still feel uncertain? What do you need from your collaborators that you haven't asked for yet?
 
-[TODO-06: Link to assessment form / decide on additional questions]
+[TODO-06: Link to assessment form when ready. Tracked in Asana.]
 
 ---
 
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ The seven areas map to the arc of this program:
 6. Program reflection
 7. What's next
 
-Be honest with each other. A "2" in conflict resolution after eight weeks isn't a failure – it means you know where to focus. This assessment also helps you understand if your studio is ready to continue together, to pause, or to part ways. All of these are valid outcomes.
+Be honest with each other. A "2" in conflict resolution after eight weeks means you know where to focus. This assessment also helps you understand if your studio is ready to continue together, to pause, or to part ways. All of these are valid outcomes.
 
 ---
 
@@ -83,25 +83,23 @@ Two questions to start: *What do you want to focus on as a studio going forward?
 
 When the program wraps up, your weekly Peer Support sessions end – but your Peer Support isn't going anywhere. They're still part of the community, and many are happy to hear from you as you hit milestones or run into challenges.
 
-Going forward, your home base for support is the Ghost Guild – Baby Ghosts' alumni community. Membership connects you to ongoing peer support, shared resources, and a network of studios who have been through this same process. Program alumni are automatically enrolled. [TODO-13: add details about what Ghost Guild membership includes and how to stay active]
+Going forward, your home base for support is the Ghost Guild – Baby Ghosts' alumni community. Program alumni are automatically enrolled. Membership includes free access to talks and workshops, community building with solo devs, early access to resources, and opportunities to become a Peer Support or contribute to the knowledge commons.
 
 ### Keep practicing
 
 Build in a revisit of your values and governance documents. Quarterly is ideal, twice a year at minimum. Put it on the calendar before you leave today. Ask: are we still practicing what we said we would? Where have we drifted? What needs updating? The studios that stay cooperatives are the ones that keep asking these questions.
 
-Build in a self-accountability practice too. Values drift can happen quietly. To prevent it, make a regular habit of asking yourself: Did my choices today align with who I want to be? Where's the gap? What do I need to clean up? This can be as simple as a five-minute reflection at the end of the week, or a quick message to a collaborator: "Hey, I was short with you yesterday. That wasn't who I want to be. Sorry." You've been building this muscle all program. Stay strong – put it alongside your governance review on the calendar.
+Build in a self-accountability practice too. Values drift can happen quietly. To prevent it, make a regular habit of asking yourself: Did my choices today align with who I want to be? This can be as simple as a five-minute reflection at the end of the week, or a quick message to a collaborator: "Hey, I was short with you yesterday. That wasn't who I want to be. Sorry." You've been building this muscle all program. Stay strong! – put it alongside your governance review on the calendar.
 
 ### Upcoming workshops
 
-We offer standalone workshops throughout the year on topics we've introduced here – and some we haven't had time to cover in the program. These are included with Ghost Guild membership or available for public registration.
-
-[TODO-05: add post-program workshop examples]
+We offer standalone workshops throughout the year on topics we've introduced here – and some we haven't had time to cover in the program. These are included with Ghost Guild membership or available for public registration. Past and upcoming workshops include: Legal Structures & By-Laws, Business Planning, Grantwriting & Alt Funding, Social Impact, Advanced Governance, Miro / Tools Workshop, Why We're Here: Telling Your Studio's Story, and Process Development.
 
 ### Interested in becoming a Peer Support?
 
 Some of you may be interested in supporting future cohorts as a Peer Support. This is a paid role and a meaningful way to build capacity in the community – you already know firsthand what studios go through, and that experience is exactly what makes a great PS.
 
-Here's what the role involves: you'd attend all program sessions alongside your assigned studios, facilitate weekly peer support meetings with one studio, and participate in PS training before the cohort starts. It's approximately 4–6 hours per week during the 10-week program. If you're someone who found yourself energized by the collaborative work, who notices group dynamics, and who cares about holding space for others – this might be a great fit. Talk to us after the session or reach out anytime.
+Here's what the role involves: you'd attend all program sessions alongside your assigned studios, facilitate weekly peer support meetings with one studio, and participate in PS training before the cohort starts. It's approximately 4-6 hours per week during the 10-week program. If you're someone who found yourself energized by the collaborative work, who notices group dynamics, and who cares about holding space for others – this might be a great fit. Talk to us after the session or reach out anytime.
 
 ### Incorporation
 
@@ -109,20 +107,23 @@ If your studio is ready to incorporate as a cooperative, we can point you toward
 
 And a reminder: you don't have to incorporate to work cooperatively. Many studios practice cooperative values and governance long before – or without ever – filing incorporation papers. The practices matter more than the paperwork.
 
-[TODO-14: Incorporation section needs further development – resources and service provider details TBD]
+[TODO-14: Develop resources, service providers, and readiness assessment. Tracked in Asana.]
 
 ---
 
 ## Collaborative Zine Making - 35 min
 
-[TODO-07: Write up zine activity instructions. Consider bringing back community agreement.]
+*Eileen leads this activity.*
 
 ---
 
 ## Closing - 5 min
 
-*What's something you're proud of from the program?*
-*What conversation did you have that you wouldn't have had otherwise?*
+You're about to re-enter an industry that defaults to hierarchy. Lawyers will draft conventional corporate structures. Funders will ask for a single point of contact. Publishers will want to know who's in charge. Your own teammates – under pressure – may reach for the familiar. This is expected. It's how we've learned to operate.
+
+There is no self-made entrepreneur. Everyone is embedded in community – cooperatives just make that explicit. You've spent eight weeks building the muscle to do that together. Keep using it.
+
+_What's something you're proud of from the program?_ _What conversation did you have that you wouldn't have had otherwise?_
 
 ---
 
@@ -134,6 +135,6 @@ And a reminder: you don't have to incorporate to work cooperatively. Many studio
 
 [TODO-04: Add due dates for assessments]
 
-And stay in touch. You're part of this community now.
+And stay in touch. You're part of this community now. 👻👻👻
 
 ---