diff --git a/WIP-enrollment-CIP.md b/WIP-enrollment-CIP.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..374a5162b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/WIP-enrollment-CIP.md
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+In my current estimation, compared to the Plutus- and Ledger-enrolling CIPs above, any CIP enrolling Consensus would be trivial.
+We've simply had many less contributors and many fewer design iterations, each of which has been a massive investment.
+My relevant suggestions are essentially just a few sentences.
+
+> The authors of any CIP that explicitly affects the Cardano consensus protocol will need to communicate early and often with some combination of the IOG Researchers and the available experts on the various existing implementations.
+> We suggest beginning by scheduling a discussion on the agenda of a session of INTERSECT's Consensus Technical Working Group.
+> The discussion there will likely involve scheduling additional discussions with the aforementioned Researchers and experts (eg the IOE Consensus Team holds weekly office hours for this sort of communication; Amaru does not hold Office Hours yet, but is planning to).
+> 
+> As the Cardano consensus protocol undergoes additional evolutions over the coming years, hopefully this CIP can be expanded to include some lessons learned that will help CIP authors usefully describe consensus changes even before entering discussions with the contemporary experts.
+> 
+> In our experience, the cognitive load of all the requirements on the consensus protocol is enormous.
+> Many newcomers would bounce off of that intimidating list and a even diligent newcomer with a relatively small change would probably find most of that list to be irrelevant.
+> An "open door" policy among the Cardano consensus experts, on the other hand, seems much more plausible to increase the likelihood of promising consensus CIPs being developed.
+> The experts welcome newcomers to sketch their idea and will happily offer the initial guidance of a specific subset of relevant concerns to consider.
+> 
+> The only apparent risk to this plan is if there's an overwhelming influx of dead-end ideas.
+> That doesn't seem likely at the moment, and we would adapt the scheme if it happens.