Post #25344

7c9296462aae60af2480f8d9459123fa8234490947f2358d0998fd80d3cd9c90
72577ce4f1d7476c505693082e042b6b125fbd0ad1c6a80da0d0cf0f9c38091b
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":1582387250,"post_data":{"edit_count":3,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"64086fa35ca6327ede47e7e4f17da24f08c74046a30886a6ff7591cb67927055561e19dfda23cae52087a5a791b438d965325e4aeec0623367f357cfb7279eac","node_id":59,"post_date":1582387074,"thread_id":3684,"user_id":8},"post_link":"https:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/3684#post-25344"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Factomize has lowered its efficiency to 0%
Interested to hear there response as to me [USERGROUP=6]@Factomize[/USERGROUP] is roughly the only entity in this system I would trust with running at 0% without much questions asked as they have always shown to have the interest of the protocol in mind.

The ANO remuneration and grantpool is about furthering the protocol. I as well as BIF/Sphereon prefer the grantpool above remuneration, but applying a general arbitrary limit against every single situation isn't correct IMO. Net result is that Factomize won't move forward at this point in time.

[USERGROUP=23]@Factomatic[/USERGROUP] [USER=24]@Tor Paulsen[/USER]
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top