diff --git a/_posts/2019-11-01-cycle-6-results.md b/_posts/2019-11-01-cycle-6-results.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..5ab154cc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/_posts/2019-11-01-cycle-6-results.md
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: "Bisq DAO Cycle 6: Results"
+author: Steve Jain
+excerpt: "Cycle 6 of the Bisq DAO ended at block 599 826 on October 17 2019. This post covers its results. <br><br>"
+ref: blog
+---
+
+This post summarizes the results of Cycle 6 of the Bisq DAO.
+
+### Summary
+
+* Cycle took place between blocks 595 147 and 599 826
+  * Calendar dates: 09/16/2019 - 10/17/2019
+* 26 proposals
+  * 2 requests to change a parameter (trading fees)
+  * 1 generic proposal
+  * 23 compensation requests
+* 190 votes cast
+* 86 851 BSQ issued
+* 19 820 BSQ burned (approximate)
+
+Much work was contributed in this cycle for the new trade protocol and account signing, two massive elements of the v1.2 release, resulting in relatively high BSQ issuance for compensating those efforts. An unfortunate drop in trading volume resulted in less BSQ taken out of supply, leading to a cycle with considerable inflation.
+
+### Proposal Details
+
+**Reduce BSQ trading fees**
+
+_Parameter changes ([link](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/126){:target="_blank"})_
+
+_Approved_
+
+This proposal suggested reducing BSQ fees to adhere more closely to 0.4% target for combined maker and taker trading fees.
+
+**Integrate Monero wallet**
+
+_Generic proposal ([link](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/110){:target="_blank"})_
+
+_Rejected_
+
+This somewhat contentious proposal to more tightly integrate Monero with Bisq garnered only 5 votes from the 13 ballots cast in this cycle, and 98.85% of the voting weight of those 5 votes opposed the proposal (proposals need less than 49.99% of opposing voting weight to be approved).
+
+The proposal raised larger questions about conventions to integrate relatively large, experimental, and perhaps risky components into the code base. An [incubator space](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/122){:target="_blank"} was proposed but is now being reconsidered. Several contributors have suggested opening a dialogue on the subject after the launch of v1.2.