Would you like Factomize to increase efficiency or have our second developer take on more projects?

Raise efficiency or more dev work?


Have not voted

Authority Nodes BI Foundation BI Foundation Factom Inc. Factom Inc. Factomatic Factomatic HashnStore HashnStore Multicoin Capital Multicoin Capital Prestige IT Prestige IT RewardChain RewardChain Syncroblock Syncroblock

  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .
Secured
#1
Factomize is on a variable efficiency and the price of FCT is at a point where we can begin to raise it. At present, the majority of our development work is performed by our Lead Developer, Who. Our other developer, Brian Gunter is also talented and has substantial forum-related dev experience. The question I have is, would you prefer Factomize to start to raise our efficiency or increase the amount of development work we're doing. All work would continue to be for the protocol and in no way profit motivated.

We're perfectly happy with either direction the community wants us to head.

I've set the close date for this poll for 48 hours so we don't delay raising efficiency if that's what ya'll prefer.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Secured
#3
It would be forum / factomprotocol.org related work. Some of it would be simply improving the modifications we already have. Some would be new modifications and tools. I'm hesitant to say exactly what because it seems priorities are constantly changing and you're all throwing wish lists at us on a regular basis :) For example, in the last 48 hours modifying the ANO Contributions system for grant updates and automated calendar implementations were requested. And they're good requests. There has been ongoing discussion about creating a solution for the contact us form on factomprotocol.org as well.

We need to add some functionality to ANO Contributions, make choosing what kind of thread to use more intuitive, makes some improvements to the timed discussion system, and the list goes on and on and on and I suspect will get longer for awhile.

Who is currently working on the Daily Digest on steroids. I need him to get on chain voting going one of these days. We may end up writing a huge grant system, etc. One of these days I'd like to transition him to a Core Developer but we're focusing on these tasks for now.

But if the preference is an efficiency increase, we're happy to do that as well.
 
Last edited:
Secured
#6
Our take is that you for now should do more dev work.

So far your have delivered A+ work, providing much needed infrastructure, and we believe there are still quite a lot to be done. We would very much like to see on-chain voting implemented through the community forum, so discussion and voting can happen in the same place (with the benefit of the votes cast being on-chain, and following an open spec).

This should of course not "be forever", so maybe a reassesment in 2 months or so would be an good idea (or if the price goes up even higher - and stay high, raise efficiency nevertheless).
 
Secured
#11
I think the work being done by Factomize is really very good and would want this to continue. Ideally it should be funded by the grant pool but to be practical Factomize should probably continue with their current efficiency. I would propose that any retention of such low efficiency be for a fixed period and not extend beyond the next grant round without review. Whatever the vote the outcomes intended should be specified, in other words please define what the use of these funds would produce. I do however echo Paul's point that the FCT price is going to be volatile and as such this picture may change ... thankfully Factomize has crafted a great way of managing this through the ANO Contributions mechanism!