This entry might be using an old signature, or it was signed by a key that does not exist on the server.
[QUOTE="factom_matt, post: 3359, member: 17"]Hello Madison,
Thank you for this question. It is an issue, but I do not consider it a problem. I touched on the solution in my reply to MattO above. If someone else is working on a project, I will consider that covered and not work on it. This is a team effort. In Factom's case specifically, if I am asked not to work on something because Factom, Inc is working it, I will consider it covered and not work on it. Even if I have my Factom Employee hat on and I am doing the work myself. You can do a million things with the Factom Protocol. Staying out of areas that Factom, Inc is working will not be difficult. Working on open source projects as an ANO does not require me to make everything I write public. What I have said is that we will be open about the open source projects we are working on in the community.
I am not planning on leaving Factom, Inc. if we are awarded ANO status.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the info [USER=17]@factom_matt[/USER]! Firstly, we'd like to clarify that we don't have any objection to inter-ANO collaboration. Indeed, one of the admirable qualities of Factom is that it's built around this sort of collaboration and is designed to prevent one party having too much power.
But all of that collaboration should happen in the community discussion channels, and we'd imagine that you have industry-standard agreements with Factom Inc that limit your ability to discuss information used to make decisions or suggestions. In addition, being an employee of another ANO or Guide establishes a hierarchical relationship that allows the employing ANO or Guide to unduly influence or pressure the employee ANO. What we're curious about is how you plan to clearly separate Factom Bridge from Factom Inc and deal with any potential conflicts of interest when it comes to furthering the Protocol as a whole. What happens when Factom Bridge and Factom Inc disagree on a decision, or you can only justify a decision by violating an agreement with your employer? These are the sort of concerns which arise when relationships like this one exist, and we'd like to learn a little bit more about the approach you're taking to prevent it.
We're positive Factom Inc is a good actor. That said, on a personal level, I know I'd be hard pressed to go directly against my employer in a public venue if I had to.