Post #688

210049d3729ee5e226f2fa8c2b27030b5c215588ff447655b2671bdb717671a8
436daf0b57f97355dc4edba213c041a5da7a71744ccab524b643e5a4376fd0fb
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":1532465606,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"912f85076ed58590e0db7cce9ede9e4822c2b7aaa7d4139ba7567f40ae189629851440a50844edaa80a4796da63a053a8d49cd9f4c2059e84a1a0c5ae768392c","node_id":10,"post_date":1524693240,"thread_id":86,"user_id":34},"post_link":"http:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/86#post-688"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Block Party
[QUOTE="Niels, post: 525, member: 8"][B]NK05)[/B]

Do you thing there are exceptions for certain type of node operators? If so could you explain?[/QUOTE]

We believe that it's natural for different aspects of the protocol to progress at different rates - all of these parallel activities wrapped up in M3 aren't intrinsically intertwined. In the case of liquidity, we don't think the conditions are optimal for this new supply to come online. So while we can't restructure the disbursement schedule, as it's hard-coded into the protocol (we believe), we can, as a community, institute a vesting schedule for node operators that better aligns everyone's interests. Can there be exceptions? We're not sure - that probably has to be part of a larger conversation with the community. However, we think it's important enough to pledge our commitment to vesting as an individual entity.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top