An Open Letter to CZ, the SEC, FTC, Vitalik, and the Crypto Community
As a token deployer, I have a number of concerns that I would like to share to help protect the community I am building. Here are 10 things that I would like to say in my open letter:
One
When people argue against the United States Securities and Exchange commission that the laws regarding securities and crypto are as clear as mud, it’s because they are. To the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, I believe you are simply setting a legal precedent so that you may continue to win cases in the future, even on technicalities that would take a law degree for project leaders like me to understand. While no one can stop you with that attempt, please also consider the sake of the individuals who invest in cryptocurrency projects. For example, please consider building a section on your website to guide project owners. I conducted a search on your website and only found basic information about avoiding scams that a fifth grader could write with minimal guidance; and then 5 more articles of similar subject material. Comments cannot be made about the rules being clear, followed by comments that Bitcoin is possibly the only non-security. Help project owners understand what process you wish everyone to take if it’s applicable to everyone, even those that fail the Howey test, to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (if that is what is legally required).
Two
When the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (unintentionally) aids to demolish a project due to technicalities like how funding was raised and whether or not someone kowtowed to the SEC, it causes fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Essentially, they threaten the liquidity of an existing project. There is no true sense of innocent until proven guilty for the token or coin and / or its promoters; so I personally consider this unfair. I don’t believe you can be both anti-scam and massively affect the liquidity of projects that aren’t even yours (in a negative way). I hope the SEC can see where I’m coming from with this line of thought, because promoters have been accused of boosting the liquidity of (allegedly “snake oil”) projects in a positive way. If this logic remains applicable to promoters then it should also, possibly, be applicable to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Three
Degen now stands for Decentralized Generation. There are bad actors in CEX and DeFi, not just BNB Chain (a community chain which is not the same as CEX Binance). CEX Binance and BNB Chain have evolved in two polar opposite directions and anything that happens of bad consequence on one should not be used to judge the other. To the crypto community, to look down on BNB Chain because it has “degens” — please don’t. It is the largest community chain in existence that was almost essentially renounced to the globe. If that’s not revolutionary, what is?
Four
The big dogs of the world know what they could lose if DeFi took over the regular business world. Major players in business will find ways to fight against that. The DeFi community is still allowed to enter global business en mass and compete by presenting superior products and services.
Let’s not let the big dogs frighten us as a community. In the face of a possible future World War, innovative technology is even more needed in the business world. Considering this, cryptocurrency is a great way for children and teenagers to gain a love for STEM careers (science, technology, engineering and mathematics).
Five
The laws regarding influencers are, in my opinion, sometimes ridiculous in how they are applied to cryptocurrency cases. Multiple people including McAfee (rest in peace) and Kim Kardashian have been targeted in lawsuits regarding crypto promotions. The lawsuit against Kim has thankfully been dismissed in federal court. McAfee is dead so there’s nothing that can be done to cancel any charges against him that regarded crypto promotions. If McAfee had admitted he was holding an asset before promoting it, it probably only would have made people want to buy it more. If he admitted to holding an asset while promoting it, if that asset didn’t work out then people could have class-action sued him for promoting something using his status instead of the value of the purchased item. I know there were other factors involved in McAfee’s case, but even if he was clear about what he was being paid to promote (allegedly he was not clear or even was misleading) would he have been in trouble either way? These rules need to be cleared up.
Six
Regarding major existing (public) call groups. These are not all “pump and dump” groups; meaning, their purpose is not to gather a number of individuals together to invest in something and then exit quickly for possible profits. Have you ever been on a brand new blockchain and almost every token is a scam (rug pull, in this case — where the liquidity is added and then withdrawn after initial purchases are placed)? Owners of call groups should not be targeted later on by the government based on technicalities. I fear that’s next and that’s why I wanted to take a stand. Reputable call group owners help vet projects to make sure, to the best of their ability, that people are launching safe projects. In exchange they are normally offered a fee for this service by the projects asking for evaluation; and they do not accept each potential paying client.
Seven
It is long overdue to investigate the role that individual holders have in ruining projects. We can’t point the blame at token owners solely. There are a lot of bad actors who are holders, as well. I’m not inciting a witch hunt, but saying again, the legal world doesn’t completely understand the crypto world yet. Maybe take a break on frivolous lawsuits and for the love of all that is good in the world dismiss the lawsuit against Ripple. I’m not a holder in Ripple, by the way (yet). But let us have one win.
Eight
Crypto is a culture and a movement and not a stock market. BNB Chain is a proving grounds for new projects that take on investment risks of -their own- to showcase their utilities and buyers take on -their own- risks to purchase tokens. That’s not gambling, necessarily. But it’s also not a stock market with established projects. It’s more like a Kickstarter with bad actors on the holder’s side. What Kickstarter have you seen where people can invest in your business idea and then take their money out the next day at a profit? And… we punish the project owners with unclear legal technicalities… why?
Nine
I have wondered if regulation crowdfunding will become the SEC’s answer to crypto / business hybrid projects. For this reason, despite everything I am challenging the SEC on, I would like to one day submit a business through this process (or follow closely another crypto’s application to this process) to evaluate it and report on how the process works so that it can be evaluated as a possible use case for avoiding SEC issues for valid cryptocurrency projects that also hold a business element.
Ten
I’m not writing this to “pump” any token that I am working on or partnered with. Sure, I’d love to have a successful token and I won’t stop building no matter what — even if one day I’m at the side of the road living under a bridge. That’s just who I am. Maybe I’m stubborn. But I am simply taking a stand for something many of us believe in deeply but cannot put words to. If there are others that disagree with me I welcome discussion comments to this post and would love to read the opposing arguments.
Thank you for your time, CZ (if you read this), the SEC (which I do believe has good intentions but does not yet comprehend the scope or magnitude of the crypto culture), the FTC, Vitalik, and the crypto community as a whole. And as a brief message to everyone who left BNB Chain for Ethereum, I want to write one last note.
When people are at the end of their rope, they do bad things sometimes. Maybe they didn’t know a better path. Sure there are tokens on BNB Chain that launch and then disappear after a few days. But think of how many “degens” can launch a website in less than 2 hours and have a fully functioning token ecosystem 2 hours beyond that with staking and all the bells and whistles. If we, as a crypto community, provide actual jobs for these individuals doing say (just as an idea) helping start-up companies with their websites before they present their ideas to venture capitalists, we’ve just provided jobs to people that are capable of amazing work and given them something better to do than test tokens while bored on the BNB Chain.
I believe in the community of the BNB Chain and the talent that the community holds. Ethereum might have the whales (big players) but I believe that BNB Chain has the innovative and capable workforce. If somehow these two forces can combine (and if the marketing/promotional laws could be clarified, and securities laws clarified), then I do believe that we could see a world where mass cryptocurrency adoption (including the safety for investors/purchasers that the Securities and Exchange Commission or the FTC aims to provide) could be a reality.
Sincerely,
Aimee Trawick (@ HoppyCat on Telegram)
M.S. Holistic Child Development, Lee University
B.A. in Psychology, Lee University
A.S. Wayne County Community College
