diff --git a/proposals/xxxx-existing-3pid-allowed.md b/proposals/xxxx-existing-3pid-allowed.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..f3daa533e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/proposals/xxxx-existing-3pid-allowed.md
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+# Allowing 3PID Owners to Rebind
+
+This is a proposal to allow 3PID owners to rebind their 3PIDs using the `POST
+/_matrix/client/r0/account/3pid/email/requestToken` endpoint. The spec
+currently states that if a user tries to call this endpoint with an email
+address they already own, then the request should be rejected.
+
+This MSC calls for those requests to be accepted iff the requesting user
+currently has the 3PID bound to their Matrix ID, marking them as the user in
+control of this 3PID.
+
+This would allow users to bind their 3PIDs to different servers, even if the
+homeserver has already been made aware of it.
+
+--- TODO, below ---
+
+## Proposal
+
+*Here is where you'll reinforce your position from the introduction in more detail, as well as cover
+the technical points of your proposal. Including rationale for your proposed solution and detailing
+why parts are important helps reviewers understand the problem at hand. Not including enough detail
+can result in people guessing, leading to confusing arguments in the comments section. The example
+here covers why templates are important again, giving a stronger argument as to why we should have
+a template. Afterwards, it goes on to cover the specifics of what the template could look like.*
+
+Having a default template that everyone can use is important. Without a template, proposals would be
+all over the place and the minimum amount of detail may be left out. Introducing a template to the
+proposal process helps ensure that some amount of consistency is present across multiple proposals,
+even if each author decides to abandon the template.
+
+The default template should be a markdown document because the MSC process requires authors to write
+a proposal in markdown. Using other formats wouldn't make much sense because that would prevent authors
+from copy/pasting the template.
+
+The template should have the following sections:
+
+* **Introduction** - This should cover the primary problem and broad description of the solution.
+* **Proposal** - The gory details of the proposal.
+* **Tradeoffs** - Any items of the proposal that are less desirable should be listed here. Alternative
+  solutions to the same problem could also be listed here.
+* **Potential issues** - This is where problems with the proposal would be listed, such as changes
+  that are not backwards compatible.
+* **Security considerations** - Discussion of what steps were taken to avoid security issues in the
+  future and any potential risks in the proposal.
+* **Conclusion** - A repeat of the problem and solution.
+
+Furthermore, the template should not be required to be followed. However it is strongly recommended to
+maintain some sense of consistency between proposals.
+
+
+## Tradeoffs
+
+*This is where alternative solutions could be listed. There's almost always another way to do things
+and this section gives you the opportunity to highlight why those ways are not as desirable. The
+argument made in this example is that all of the text provided by the template could be integrated
+into the proposals introduction, although with some risk of losing clarity.*
+
+Instead of adding a template to the repository, the assistance it provides could be integrated into
+the proposal process itself. There is an argument to be had that the proposal process should be as
+descriptive as possible, although having even more detail in the proposals introduction could lead to
+some confusion or lack of understanding. Not to mention if the document is too large then potential
+authors could be scared off as the process suddenly looks a lot more complicated than it is. For those
+reasons, this proposal does not consider integrating the template in the proposals introduction a good
+idea.
+
+
+## Potential issues
+
+*Not all proposals are perfect. Sometimes there's a known disadvantage to implementing the proposal,
+and they should be documented here. There should be some explanation for why the disadvantage is
+acceptable, however - just like in this example.*
+
+Someone is going to have to spend the time to figure out what the template should actually have in it.
+It could be a document with just a few headers or a supplementary document to the process explanation,
+however more detail should be included. A template that actually proposes something should be considered
+because it not only gives an opportunity to show what a basic proposal looks like, it also means that
+explanations for each section can be described. Spending the time to work out the content of the template
+is beneficial and not considered a significant problem because it will lead to a document that everyone
+can follow.
+
+
+## Security considerations
+
+*Some proposals may have some security aspect to them that was addressed in the proposed solution. This
+section is a great place to outline some of the security-sensitive components of your proposal, such as
+why a particular approach was (or wasn't) taken. The example here is a bit of a stretch and unlikely to
+actually be worthwhile of including in a proposal, but it is generally a good idea to list these kinds
+of concerns where possible.*
+
+By having a template available, people would know what the desired detail for a proposal is. This is not
+considered a risk because it is important that people understand the proposal process from start to end.
+
+
+## Conclusion
+
+*Repeating the problem and solution in different words helps reviewers understand the problem a bit more.
+This section should wrap up any loose ends left in the document, as well as cover a brief overview of the
+content in each section. Note that the example here doesn't touch on the specific implementation details
+described in the "Proposal" section - just the high-level points made there.*
+
+Not having a template for people to follow when making their proposals could lead to large differences
+between each MSC. This would make it difficult for reviewers, and there's a potential that some information
+could be left out by accident. A template written in the same format the proposal process requires would
+give authors the ability to understand how to better explain their own proposal.
+
+A descriptive template would help potential authors comprehend what the proposal process requires by
+demonstrating what is expected of a proposal. Although this is more effort up front, it would lead to more
+time saved in the future due to questions about the process.