Question for Factoshi from Niels Klomp

Chappie

Factomize Bot
@Factoshi,

@Niels Klomp asked the following question:

As BIF we are asking all ANOs these questions.

  1. What type of parties would you see the protocol attract as users?
  2. Do you believe current governance to accommodate that?
  3. What is your take on current standing parties and types? Anything needing to change?
  4. Can you mention anything about decisiveness and decision making as well as direction?
  5. Do you believe you are qualified to vote on every single thing?
  6. Do you believe large institutions and governments could use the protocol with current governance as is?
  7. Do you believe parties can make long term commitments towards the protocol at this time?
  8. Do you believe you are doing everything in your power to address any concerns about the above?
 

Alex

Factoshi
1. I expect BaaS providers to be the primary users of the protocol. Companies like Sphereon and Inc who have a product to sell and use Factom as the data layer of that product. I hope their clients are enterprise and government.

2. No.

3. I believe that we need a third standing party that has much greater independence from ANOs. These would ideally be token holders, though I recognise that ANOs are likely to be the largest token holders by far, so I am not exactly sure what the best way is to handle that. I'd like to see a system akin to DPoS where ANOs are held accountable to outside parties, rather than accountable only to other ANOs.

4. It is hard to make decisions due to the lack of an effective leader. That is both a good and a bad thing. Good, because it is a reflection of a decentralised governance process were no one person or entity holds too much power. Bad, because it is hard to get things done. As a consequence, we lack overall direction.

5. No.

6. I don't know. Probably not. I suspect they would need some kind of accountability and to see a steady hand steering the ship. So far, the only protocols I know of that are being used by large institutions or governments tend to have some kind of central authority. This is true of VeChain, IOTA, Ethereum and a few others.

7. No, but I would probably cite protocol stability and a low token price as the primary cause of insecurity rather than our governance.

8. I try, yes. However, I do not have a clear vision for how to overcome many of our problems, so action is not always easy.
 

Niels Klomp

Guide
BI Foundation
Core Committee
Hi @Alex thx for the insightful responses, appreciated.

I have some small follow up questions

1. I expect BaaS providers to be the primary users of the protocol. Companies like Sphereon and Inc who have a product to sell and use Factom as the data layer of that product. I hope their clients are enterprise and government.
Interesting. Since we have a background in platforms and API's with a business model of working through partners (almost) solely, we as no other know how hard that is to get of the ground. We made a conscious choice to go down that route as we say a need after the initial blockchain hype. But it wouldn't expect others to come up with BaaS as party type.

Any specific reasons?

Any area you feel less comfortable voting?
 

Alex

Factoshi
Interesting. Since we have a background in platforms and API's with a business model of working through partners (almost) solely, we as no other know how hard that is to get of the ground. We made a conscious choice to go down that route as we say a need after the initial blockchain hype. But it wouldn't expect others to come up with BaaS as party type.
Well, you would know more about this than I do. However, the reason that I say BaaS is that I tend to believe that companies that offer specific products that satisfy the needs of a customer are better positioned to gain traction than the raw factomd API. I don't tend to believe that we will simply see large tech companies turn up, spin up a node, then start committing entries. I think there is likely to be some kind of intermediary between them and the blockchain, which is where companies like Sphereon and Inc sit.

So, I want enterprise/government to be the end user, but I believe BaaS service providers will be the people actually committing entries, and it will be these people we need to lure.

What do you think?

Any specific reasons?
I think we tend to oscillate between periods of indecision and periods of sudden, and oftentimes poorly considered, action. We do not have a longterm vision that we are methodically executing. I believe that makes us appear unstable and unreliable. How can users make a longterm commitment if there isn't a unified longterm vision?

Any area you feel less comfortable voting?
Particularly in areas related to marketing and promotional work. For example, when it comes to rebranding I am comfortable offering an opinion, but I have little experience of branding and I also have little experience of promoting the brand.
 
Top