Post #25319

a3323b503cfbe35b59b0bbd0915804be0dc396fe18c2de3d7ebc2e06a7899139
541e22229bf74893709c5880b8263dda11cfd4162ba755b4d081e96277c390b0
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":1582380002,"post_data":{"edit_count":2,"last_edit_date":1582379957,"last_edit_user_id":8,"message_sha512":"8e491748328eb6ea2e24c4823095d060958fd03bb4664996118f128051a291f047827ed187c8a91812d9a76fd9f4d23b7e78f8e02f697c05656661bc4c91fd1e","node_id":102,"post_date":1582379618,"thread_id":3806,"user_id":8},"post_link":"https:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/3806#post-25319"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Tor Paulsen Removed Standing for BI Foundation
[QUOTE="Tor Paulsen, post: 25317, member: 24"]
Keep in mind that standing can easily be reinstated and I even wrote that I would in my explanation for removing standing.

We need some minimum standards for reporting from ANOs even if they are the "rockstars of the community", and a short and sweet update that [I]"things are progressing well, and we are starting a RFP which will hopefully lead to an unpaid POC for some entities. That POC is projected at 50k dollars. It is competing against other parties and after winning it there is no guarantee you get to execute as this large entity even mentions they might not move forward with it."[/I] would be kind of sufficient. But there has been nothing for 304 days, with 3 people requesting updates starting November 30th last year. That in my book warrants removing of standing, but I will be more than happy to reapply it after the community gets an update on progress.
[/QUOTE]
Yupz, guess that is where we disagree, since you know about a lot we are doing. Most people see us interacting daily, doing work in committees and workgroups, providing some updates about work we are doing with Digital Asset and for instance the clothing exhibit. Yes we need to be better at reporting. Which we already promised and even made somebody available partly to do.

But then to use it as a weapon whilst at the same time you know we are executing on multiple fronts (and even know more than some others) and the only thing is missing updates in which we will have to be vague, given the size of projects and clients, well I am telling you you are reaching exactly the opposite of what you are trying to do.

And expecting us to disclose info about projects we take risks for as a company is not gonna happen as well. This was just an example (of multiple I have), to show that thinking there is virtually no risk involved is nonsense.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top