Post #29472

0b9e2d018126be640a0468be265c399a364266b8a82d2e5e936f4b0ffa7fae42
62542ea3adf8cec7c1be1e8280d56dc086d22f94794e39d5e14ce88ae934e56e
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":1595871844,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"b939b867ecb27e74c62044110c35aab9f9590d52dba3b38aaa48c2a552aea73877d3426b25860190a34802e8ae667707ff7940e0c3d647e38a24f29c76bdd1e4","node_id":52,"post_date":1595871738,"thread_id":5298,"user_id":48},"post_link":"https:\/\/forum.factomprotocol.org\/index.php?threads\/5298#post-29472"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Non-Profit Organisation
I think establishing the NPO is a good first step in catalyzing the change needed to move in the right direction. I do appreciate the question regarding the necessity of the NPO vice the executive committee. For the sake of discussion, what are the roles and responsibilities of either? With the passage of the GWG proposal, is the NPO necessary if the EC is going to be the "face and voice" of the protocol? I'm open to both but participation is abysmal and worry two "organizations" will only strain manpower resources when we should be coalescing behind a single organization. Could the charter of the NPO be one where the EC are board members of said NPO?
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top