As you might remember, [referendum 193](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referendum/193) aiming to make RMRK token sufficient was discussed, submitted and approved by the community. However, the call did not execute succesfully and RMRK token failed to be defined as sufficient on Statemine: the message didn't have root origin, it had `Xcm` origin.

The RMRK sufficiency proposal was passed via referendum, giving it the most powerful `Root` origin at dispatch. But within the proposal was a message to Statemine with an `Xcm` origin, normally used to express things like "majority of Council" as an XCM Multilocation.

The privileged Assets origin on Statemine expects:

`EnsureOneOf<EnsureRoot<AccountId>, EnsureXcm<IsMajorityOfBody<KsmLocation, ExecutiveBody>>>`

As in, the origin should either be "Root" or "The majority of the executive body (Council) on Kusama)". The USDT proposal used Superuser (a.k.a. Root), so it passed the `EnsureRoot` check. The RMRK one, however, had downgraded Root to Xcm, so when the message arrived, it went down the `EnsureXcm` route, to which the filter said, "that's not the majority of the Council," causing it to reject the origin.

This proposal, a sole council motion, ensures the majority of Council to enact the proposal in the right way, since the same proposal was already approved by the community. 

Please review and vote at your convenience!

- A proposal was made to make RMRK token sufficient.
- The proposal was approved by the community but did not execute successfully.
- The message for the proposal had the wrong origin, causing it to be rejected.
- A new proposal is being made to ensure the majority of the Council enacts the proposal correctly.
- People are being asked to review and vote on the new proposal.

#483 Proposal for RMRK token sufficiency on Statemine: An Amended Proposal