Conversation

This roughly lines up with my instincts fwiw; thanks for writing up

! We need

advocating for us online and making the bull case for blockchain And *I* would think that we need people hashing out the *details* in DC--implementing the will of industry.

Quote Tweet

Ron Hammond

@RonwHammond

Nov 1

This week in Congress and Crypto: It is not too often a podcast is the talk of the town in DC, but the @BanklessHQ debate between @SBF_FTX and @ErikVoorhees was just that. As a former Hill staffer who worked on crypto legislation and current lobbyist, here are some thoughts...

Show this thread

124

244

Replying to

and

With respect, I am not here to make the "bull case for blockchain." I've done nothing of the sort during our discussion. I am here to remind the industry of the *moral/philosophic principle* on which this industry exists: that money should be separated from state.

599

Replying to

and

sorry, my phrasing was lazy -- I wasn't trying to refer to prices or to imply that it was stronger than what you thought--just that, in e.g. DC, people would generally interpret what you say as "one of the most pro-blockchain beliefs" Which is good! Someone has to express it.

Replying to

and

If I may be pedantic... even that phrasing is missing the mark. What I'm conveying isn't advocacy of a technology for tech sake. It's not "pro-blockchain." It's about the *principles* enabled by such technology. Pro-liberty Pro-crypto Pro-market These would be better choices.

110

Replying to

and

So I agree with you about what you're saying but I still think it is likely true that, in DC, *it would be interpreted as* "one of the most pro-blockchain beliefs" maybe I'm wrong about how it would be interpreted in DC, though!

Replying to

and

I'm making specific claims about how things will play out and be interpreted in DC You're making philosophical statements I'm not disagreeing with your statements! But that's not responsive to my claims of how DC will happen to respond to things.

Replying to

and

again, I might be wrong on empirically how DC will respond to things! Maybe I am. But "What I'm conveying" is not actually the same thing as "what DC will interpret you as".

6:16 PM · Nov 1, 2022Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

has experience working with regulators and understands how to help shape the narrative (with the best intent).

@ErikVoorhees

does not want to give any room for compromise (with the best intent). Both have the best intentions and their track records check out.

Replying to

and

Why do people keep saying I "give no room for compromise"? Can we end this sophistry please? It's a question of what/where such compromises are reasonable.

Show replies

Replying to

and

Tact for Defi: Defi is open source, Open source is protected speech, Speech is protected by the Bill of Rights, The Bill of Rights is a part of the Constitution, An attack on the Constitution is treason. Take a hard line as they don’t care about freedom! Just my 2 sats.

Show more replies