Post #31397

e81a4b0c081090804aa7dce1ecc436f1ebd31bf3d3ea06fa1b84a3a930b9b734
6f94140846f7bbecdc1d156c9b0041da9d366562be31b49d393e87774e1f40e5
e2c61429397da55a5ee7749088023feb12e0e8e261dfeba32ee7c0794f9a12f8
Signature verified

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

{"entry_date":1611162377,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"e5dc7bbaa4a3b7a1f1cdcd790a38ae9b6e92f22f0571892d72690124e0aa8f018c162fe4fb40f7af6376ee6bc7079889de3f4ee8d07972e645283e92d72f3ca3","node_id":52,"post_date":1611162377,"thread_id":5637,"user_id":8},"post_link":"https:\/\/forum.factomprotocol.org\/threads\/batched-amendment-strategy-and-resource-director-proposal.5637\/post-31397"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Batched Amendment - Strategy and Resource Director Proposal
[QUOTE="PaulSnow, post: 31396, member: 29"]
We do have more issues to track than many projects. I think tracking them and making progress of the critical items will not hurt us.
[/QUOTE]
Totally agree, hence why I would reach out to all parties. But you need differentiation of what the protocol will accomplish next few quarters and what the wider community is doing. Ideally these are very complementary, but as a protocol you cannot paint to nice of a picture if you are not in full control of it
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top