merging updates addressing feedback

docs/articles/governance/Proposals/templates.en.mdx

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ The Evmos Governance Framework allows for various different types of proposals,
 
 All proposals must include the following **Proposal Components**. 
 
+:::tip
 <p style={{ fontSize: '0.9rem'}}>**Title** - Short and sweet, with the [correct tags](/governance/proposals/definitions#proposal-phase--identification-tags) prefixed.</p>
 
 <p style={{ fontSize: '0.9rem'}}>**Author(s)** - List of authors and contributors involved in the writing of the proposal.</p>
@@ -15,9 +16,11 @@ All proposals must include the following **Proposal Components**.
 <p style={{ fontSize: '0.9rem'}}>**Abstract** - Abstract is a multi-sentence (short paragraph) technical summary. This should be a very terse and human-readable version of the motivation and specification sections. Someone should be able to read only the abstract to get the gist of what this specification does.</p>
 
 <p style={{ fontSize: '0.9rem'}}>**Motivation** - The motivation section should describe the "why" of this proposal. What problem does it solve? What benefit does it provide to the Evmos network?</p>
+:::
 
 ## B. Project/Protocol Introduction
 
+:::tip
 <h3 style={{ marginTop: 0 }}>Project / Initiative Specification</h3>
 <hr />
 
@@ -40,9 +43,10 @@ List all the achievements you have managed to accomplish so far, and the obstacl
 <li>Long Term Goals (12+ months)</li>
 <li>Success Metrics and/or KPIs to measure the growth of your project</li>
 </ul>
+:::
 
 ## C. Funding Request
-
+:::tip
 <h3 style={{ marginTop: 0 }}>Fund Utilization and Distribution</h3>
 <hr />
 
@@ -82,10 +86,10 @@ If at any point the community believes that the Marketing Workstream is not fulf
 <h4>Closing Statements</h4>
 
 Final thoughts and details that you wish to convey to the community. 
-
+:::
 
 ## D. Workstreams & Special Initiatives
-
+:::tip
 Anyone may start a workstream and gather momentum behind it by posting on Commonwealth. For more information on Workstream proposals, refer to [this section](/governance/proposals/definitions#workstream--special-initiatives).
 
 
@@ -128,7 +132,7 @@ If the workstream was previously working informally, what did it achieve? If goi
 <h4>Total Budget</h4>
 
 What amount is required for the workstream to achieve the initial target, and how will it be spent?
-
+:::
 ## F. Protocol (ParamChange) Proposals
 
 Refer to the [official Evmos documentation](https://docs.evmos.org/users/governance/param_change.html) for protocol and `ParamChange` proposals.

docs/articles/governance/voting.md

@@ -6,10 +6,12 @@ The voting period is currently a fixed 5-day period. During the voting period, p
 
 ## Voting Options
 
-1. **`Abstain`**: indicates that the voter is impartial to the outcome of the proposal.
-2. **`Yes`**: indicates approval of the proposal in its current form.
-3. **`No`**: indicates disapproval of the proposal in its current form.
-4. **`NoWithVeto`**: indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting `No`. If the number of `NoWithVeto` votes is greater than a third of total votes excluding `Abstain` votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are [burned](#burned-deposits).
+<ol>
+   <li>1. **`Abstain`**: indicates that the voter is impartial to the outcome of the proposal.</li>
+   <li>2. **`Yes`**: indicates approval of the proposal in its current form.</li>
+   <li>3. **`No`**: indicates disapproval of the proposal in its current form.</li>
+   <li>4. **`NoWithVeto`**: indicates stronger opposition to the proposal than simply voting `No`. If the number of `NoWithVeto` votes is greater than a third of total votes excluding `Abstain` votes, the proposal is rejected and the deposits are [burned](#burned-deposits).</li>
+</ol>
 
 Voting `NoWithVeto` provides a mechanism for a minority group representing a *third* of the participating voting power to reject a proposal that would otherwise pass. This makes explicit an aspect of the consensus protocol: it works as long as only up to [a third of nodes fail](https://docs.tendermint.com/v0.35/introduction/what-is-tendermint.html). In other words, greater than a third of validators are always in a position to cause a proposal to fail outside the formalized governance process and the network's norms, such as by censoring transactions. The purpose of internalizing this aspect of the consensus protocol into the governance process is to discourage validators from relying on collusion and censorship tactics to influence voting outcomes.