Post #2340

5fa1da7f5a546cd239fd7f427ae79109eab0be2a7ec8511c9885e3af575c226c
21b4389e786faa3953f4b2e887f447a81cf902a3b3cbc1f1712c02417b0caad9
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":1532465707,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"b40b65d0e3a57d2d1e2a8ec5383f3d49643381f62c10c36195db81b64ca23d6269bcb9b1906623bc090266cdd1605bec4b7a93ba6395096ad0fbeb29a1fbece0","node_id":17,"post_date":1529175170,"thread_id":423,"user_id":56},"post_link":"http:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/423#post-2340"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Committee Refactor Proposal
I like this.

One change I would make to this plan is keeping Strategy, maybe Strategy/Use_Case its own committee.

Strategy is a focused, step by step committee laying out a long term vision, whereas Marketing/Exchange seems a little more free form. Additionally, we already have an extremely well thought out roadmap for the strategy committee that its only a matter of executing on. Im hesitant to restructure that committees processes, and think it makes a good stand alone.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top