Post #31382

e81a4b0c081090804aa7dce1ecc436f1ebd31bf3d3ea06fa1b84a3a930b9b734
76397d6f821cdd08d9a6ffc8a9300b7ac0fc14504caaf0180fb82de1642d9b6b
e2c61429397da55a5ee7749088023feb12e0e8e261dfeba32ee7c0794f9a12f8
Signature verified

The signature from the blockchain entry has been verified against an identity on this server.

{"entry_date":1610997973,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"32616e5ed43a30d505bf46efce0eb1353262576f1f2f34638877fd2e1b3de9e0e5e276238ad1bb76c3250908796834a7b3e70aca4d5937036e967f5915359ab4","node_id":52,"post_date":1610997973,"thread_id":5637,"user_id":9},"post_link":"https:\/\/forum.factomprotocol.org\/threads\/batched-amendment-strategy-and-resource-director-proposal.5637\/post-31382"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Batched Amendment - Strategy and Resource Director Proposal
Thanks to [USER=175]@WB[/USER] for running the "[URL='https://forum.factomprotocol.org/threads/factom-leadership-and-decision-making-vote-2.5634/']Leadership and Decision making vote[/URL]". The final result was 8-6 in favor of the council. However, we know two of the three abstaining parties have shown support for the Director proposal, so we're really looking at an 8-8 tie.

Because we are truly deadlocked, I think we should use this discussion thread to hash this out once-and-for-all by diving into the details instead of just discussing things from a "theoretical" standpoint.

I'll get that ball rolling...

Here's the simple question every ANO needs to ask itself:

[U]"Which approach provides Factom the best chance of success - Director or Council?"[/U]

1. [USER=8]@Niels Klomp[/USER] - Would you like to share your vision for Factom under a Director approach?

2.Vidale / [USER=32]@Jason Gregoire[/USER] (or anyone else) - Would you like to share your vision for Factom under a council approach?

Thank you in advance.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top