Post #3695

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.

The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Veteran Blockchain Investment Firm

[I]NK01) Now you are pledging 50% to the grantpool. In reality every ANO can decide what their efficiency will be once onboarded. There might be some social aspects to that as well, but you would be in a good position, since you made it clear from day one.[/I]

[I]As such I believe it to be a fair question on whether to rate this at 25% percent. Otherwise everybody will put in submissions in this form in the future. Any thoughts on that?[/I]


Thank you for your question. If I were in your position and the positions of the guides, I would score the overall efficiency as 50% and here is why:

1. On day one of our acceptance into the authority set, our efficiency for both nodes will be set to 50%.

2. The establishment of the endowment is not a streamlined process and will not be completed for months. We have been waiting for the ANO selection announcement to take the next steps in formalizing the relationship with WVU. Offering to fund an endowment without any legitimacy would be irresponsible of us and wasteful of the WVU foundation’s time. The initial reception from WVU has been warm and we are excited about the potential outcomes. The endowment is not guaranteed; however, we see this as a major piece in our commitment to the protocol to establish as quickly as feasibly possible. Being that this is a community, we plan to open any efficiency adjustment to discussion on the Factomize forum, discord, etc… to ensure everyone is aware of our intent and whether it is appropriate to proceed prior to changing any efficiency. We accept any pressures (and repercussions) if we go changing our efficiency without discussing it and without the approval of the community at-large, but have no intention to do so. In an effort to be open and honest with the guides, other ANO’s (including candidates), and the community, we wanted to disclose our plan for executing the endowment should we be successful at establishing it. At the end of the day, the endowment will be to further and grow the protocol for the long-term. We would not be proposing to change our efficiency if we did not feel this was the case.

3. We see the discussion in the market channels. The existing FCT price and community concern regarding inflation has led us to evaluate our position with regards to self-funding this initiative. We would like to think a press release announcing this endowment will have immediate positive effect on the excitement within the community and to garner an institutional-level awareness outside the community looking at what Factom brings to the blockchain technology sector. We will do everything in our power to establish this endowment, but may be faced with the reality that funding it is impossible until the dollar value of FCT recovers. It pains us to think that this may be the case, but it is true. Regardless of the outcome, both of Veteran’s nodes will remain set to 50% efficiency, contributing to the grant pool until the establishment, discussion, and hopeful funding of the endowment.
Our goal as an ANO is first and foremost to securely run successful authority nodes to further decentralize the protocol. Our firms members are committed to growing the protocol in whatever means necessary and we will find the time when available to expand our government outreach (via both the GovCloud and SBIR/STTR/DIU grant) and establishing the endowment fund as our primary and immediate objectives. In addition; we will be attending events where we can market the value Factom brings to entities who may be hesitant about blockchain technology as well as continuing our community involvement.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.