Yeah, and I’m surprised that you would use the “risk-taking” frame. I mean, 10 years ago, certainly you were taking on some risks if you tried broad listening. I think in this day and age, certainly the way we sold it in California, it is sold as purely a risk-reducing move. In the sense that all the technologies are mature. Not just mature, they’re open source. You can really audit them. And we enable people who are on the ground—the Eaton and Palisades people, the Department of Angels, the social sector, and so on. So we’re not bypassing the existing self-organized civil society organizations; we’re enabling their voice to be amplified, connecting them with other conversation networks. By, first of all, working with the existing civil society organizations and city landscape, and second, by saying we’re just offering tools to save you time and reduce your risk, I think that is a kind of Pareto improvement ticket. Instead of “you’re taking on some risk to try something that may save you more time downstream,” it is “something that saves you a little bit of time and reduces a little bit of risk, right now.” And I think that is much easier to introduce, especially to city councils.