diff --git a/proposals/3845-expanding-policy-rooms-to-reputation.md b/proposals/3845-expanding-policy-rooms-to-reputation.md
index 5026a9e00..f942287dc 100644
--- a/proposals/3845-expanding-policy-rooms-to-reputation.md
+++ b/proposals/3845-expanding-policy-rooms-to-reputation.md
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ The Matrix network and protocol are open. However, some users, rooms or servers
 entities from individual rooms, spaces or other groups of rooms. This happens in particular when
 a user or an entire homeserver adopt toxic behaviors, such as bullying, spamming or attempting to brigade
 other users. As it turns out, kicking, ignoring or banning entities is a complicated task in
-presence of federation. To aid with such actions, MSC2313 defines a vocabulary for storing,
+presence of federation. To aid with such actions, the Matrix spec defines [a vocabulary](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.3/client-server-api/#mban-recommendation) for storing,
 publishing and sharing *recommendations* on entities, in particular banning.
 Individual users, room or space moderators or even homeserver administrators may either issue
 such recommendations or follow existing recommendations, in both cases letting clients/bots/homeservers
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ In many cases, however, banning is too boolean. Actually deciding whether an ent
 after taking into account several sources. For instance, a community may decide to adopt a policy
 through which a user is banned from the entire community if they behave as a troll on at least three
 of their rooms. If they behave as a troll in a single room, they should perhaps get away with a warning,
-or perhaps be muted for 15 minutes, etc.
+or perhaps be muted for 15 minutes, or lose the ability to post links and images, etc.
 
 To achieve this, we need two mechanisms:
 - a mechanism to store, publish and share the *opinion* of a community (or a single user) on an entity;
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ against entities that they judge malicious or toxic to their own well-being.
 
 ## Proposal
 
-MSC2313 defines `m.policy.rule.<kind>` state events, as follows:
+The Matrix spec [defines](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.3/client-server-api/#mban-recommendation)  `m.policy.rule.<kind>` state events, as follows:
 
 ```jsonc
 {
@@ -97,6 +97,14 @@ actually not an issue but rather a feature. If these communities cannot trust ea
 judgement, perhaps because they share different worldviews, they should not attempt to use
 each other's published opinions.
 
+### Combining Opinions
+
+This MSC does not specify how to combine opinions from two trusted groups. If group A assigns
+an opinion of -20 to Marvin and group B assigns an opinion of -10 to Marvin, does this mean
+that Marvin should have a total opinion of -30? -15?
+
+We do not expect to specify this in the current MSC but rather in a further MSC down the line,
+once the Matrix community has had the opportunity to experiment with opinions.
 
 ### Malicious Gossip
 
@@ -134,6 +142,9 @@ analysis. By opposition, the mechanism of opinions can be audited. Further, tool
 e.g. in Matrix clients to let users investigate the opinions they follow, tweak them,
 deactivate them.
 
+It is our hope that the mechanism of explicit opinions will actually help fight thought
+bubbles.
+
 ## Alternatives
 
 Alternative solutions have been proposed to combat online toxicity. However, these solutions