Post #2322

5fa1da7f5a546cd239fd7f427ae79109eab0be2a7ec8511c9885e3af575c226c
16b901229dc5c62f2063967929e0dc82fc688f01c811f2d20b4771788d1b8f48
Signature not verified

This entry might be using an old signature, or it was signed by a key that does not exist on the server.

{"entry_date":1532465706,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"ce6adfdbac42a433ceeab969c73fb10906c9683daef288e6d4405fd38f4b8e9b4783b14a3703984736ee6802f1fa881b6a852529261da1a7f8f434cdf28dbf57","node_id":17,"post_date":1529120842,"thread_id":423,"user_id":94},"post_link":"http:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/423#post-2322"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Committee Refactor Proposal
I agree completely with forum dilution. There are multiple points channels within the Factom Discord and then to find info here I find myself sifting, searching and sometimes moving on. Of course the market will always play a role with engagement; we're seeing this across the board from socials, communities, trading volume, etc.

So the merge is proposing three different committees?

Up until this point, were members from ANOs not able to step up?
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top