Post #29480

0b9e2d018126be640a0468be265c399a364266b8a82d2e5e936f4b0ffa7fae42
1eadac8131da58dbe0c24f807624e8bb3b538e3bf22475de59f0cd0aeeace9fd
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":1595882283,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"f0cac197d187f6961cf905d4fe53b06b05506d146d74c7358fbaff88f9bfcdb32aaa8cec1454857db268461e9d0e5e90cc6068793a0910bda37ff93acfea22fd","node_id":52,"post_date":1595882114,"thread_id":5298,"user_id":175},"post_link":"https:\/\/forum.factomprotocol.org\/index.php?threads\/5298#post-29480"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Non-Profit Organisation
[QUOTE="Nolan Bauer, post: 29477, member: 48"]
I agree that the legitimacy (or perception of) is key here. We've had plenty of reasons why we did not organize in the past. If it is quick, relatively inexpensive, and legitimate, then I would prefer to organize the EC as directors of the NPO.
[/QUOTE]

I'm willing to explore it. As mentioned [URL='https://forum.factomprotocol.org/threads/governance-implementation-group.5293/#post-29479']here[/URL], the new group will start a timed discussion (once we're up and running) on what the EC should look like. That'd be an excellent time to work this out and possibly add the above as a poll option.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top