Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The governance problem is what defi and more to the point DEFI 2.O (FLARE), is tackling head on, can we all learn to trust the protocol... watch this space, traditional government oversight is not needed hopefully :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 24
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I am not sure if I should put this here or on to Pablo's thread?

And what do you have to offer better?? I mean it's easy to bring somebody down, but what's your alternative?? At least be able to give us a contradictory take before you trash someone else's.  He stat

Dig if you will this picture,  The SEC case ends in settlement or a trial XRP comes out the end with definitive clarity at this point no other crypto has this.  Now lets look at the big picture here i

Still reminds me of the Mr. Robot scene where the mfer is in the office of the treasury or something telling him to let ecoin through, regulate it, monitor it, control it, etc. But don't shut it down. 

I'm sure that relates more to a JPM Coin or something of that magnitude, but the parallels with this Ripple case are pretty spectacular. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, yannis said:

Why on earth are people giving this guy so much credence - he's a personal accident lawyer who specialises in ambulance-chasing. Not anywhere on his company site does it mention anything about financial law, investment law, crypto, the SEC, anything of the sort.

He just puts his suit on and lots of people snap to attention to listen to the smart-sounding man. I'm sure he's good at getting you money for falling over on the sidewalk or whatever, but come on.

And what do you have to offer better?? I mean it's easy to bring somebody down, but what's your alternative?? At least be able to give us a contradictory take before you trash someone else's.  He states many times he is not a securities lawyer, but he still has the skills to interpret law, etc.  What is the last case you have worked on?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, yannis said:

Why on earth are people giving this guy so much credence - he's a personal accident lawyer who specialises in ambulance-chasing. Not anywhere on his company site does it mention anything about financial law, investment law, crypto, the SEC, anything of the sort.

He just puts his suit on and lots of people snap to attention to listen to the smart-sounding man. I'm sure he's good at getting you money for falling over on the sidewalk or whatever, but come on.

Actually I would far sooner listen to this Guy in his Suit than a 1000 Alex Cobb Types or the 3 that got invited to Swell and then asked to be paid for the info,

I'll stick with Attorney Hogan for now at least

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2021 at 1:54 AM, RikkiTikki_is_Back said:

And what do you have to offer better?? I mean it's easy to bring somebody down, but what's your alternative?? At least be able to give us a contradictory take before you trash someone else's.  He states many times he is not a securities lawyer, but he still has the skills to interpret law, etc.  What is the last case you have worked on?

"This is the best we can get therefore it is beyond reproach" is the absolute worst attitude to have.

23 hours ago, cannylad said:

Actually I would far sooner listen to this Guy in his Suit than a 1000 Alex Cobb Types or the 3 that got invited to Swell and then asked to be paid for the info,

I'll stick with Attorney Hogan for now at least

I totally understand this, I do. The usual YT bros can do one for all I care. I just think there's something to be said for being a bit cautious about who you're listening to, rather than just fawning over them* because they've got a proper job.

(*not saying you specifically are fawning over them, just a generalisation)

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, yannis said:

"This is the best we can get therefore it is beyond reproach" is the absolute worst attitude to have.

I totally understand this, I do. The usual YT bros can do one for all I care. I just think there's something to be said for being a bit cautious about who you're listening to, rather than just fawning over them* because they've got a proper job.

(*not saying you specifically are fawning over them, just a generalisation)

Again what do you have to offer in lieu???  I come from the era where we don't shoot a person's idea's or thoughts down we prove we have something better and let our work do the talking.  Nobody said it is beyond reproach but typically you come with something better than just lip service when you do approach.  The fact that this guy clearly explains every time that he is not a securities lawyer but he is giving us advice from a general law perspective as a lawyer is ok by me.   I have plenty of lawyer friends myself and I have been in situations where I need to consult one who does not specialize in the type of scenario I need one for but what they have given me is general legal advice, so when I do go to the specialized lawyer that they have recommended I have a real good feel and ideal of how things will transpire moving forward, what they will be looking for etc. In some cases I've even been given a general feel for the judge residing over things and this is pretty much what Hogan has given us no Hopium or none of that other crap you see on these other YT sites, just his interpretation of the presented information from a general legal perspective.  If you have something better the XRP community is waiting!!!.     I mean I don't mean to ride down on you but if you have something better I think we all would love to see it...  Honestly you came in the forum like a Bridge Troll because your argument against this guy really has no credence  because he has pretty much explained what he is and what he is not from the beginning.

Edited by RikkiTikki_is_Back
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, yannis said:

"This is the best we can get therefore it is beyond reproach" is the absolute worst attitude to have.

I totally understand this, I do. The usual YT bros can do one for all I care. I just think there's something to be said for being a bit cautious about who you're listening to, rather than just fawning over them* because they've got a proper job.

(*not saying you specifically are fawning over them, just a generalisation)

Do you really think it is fawning to listen?    Do you value expertise before clarity and common sense?   

I also listen carefully to @Pablo because he is an expert in this field and very cautious, more cautious than Hogan or Deaton.

In an interview given by Deaton and Hogan they made a very interesting point about expert lawyers, saying that expert lawyers tend not to question the status quo like outsiders do, and sometimes this leads to them losing cases.   The outsiders tend to have a more agile approach which can reap rewards.  So you need a mixture of expertise and new approach.  I think Deaton, an outsider with his unorthodox approach, has already contributed to forcing SEC to make errors which might well cost SEC dear when/if this case continues much longer.  

I think the law is much more emotional than making a strict reading of facts.  This is why we have judges and juries.  We expect a human perspective in law making and law enforcement.  We do not simply bow our heads and say you lot go into a room and work it all out and then tell us the answers.  Leaving things to experts is a really bad idea.  

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

Do you really think it is fawning to listen?    Do you value expertise before clarity and common sense?   

I also listen carefully to @Pablo because he is an expert in this field and very cautious, more cautious than Hogan or Deaton.

In an interview given by Deaton and Hogan they made a very interesting point about expert lawyers, saying that expert lawyers tend not to question the status quo like outsiders do, and sometimes this leads to them losing cases.   The outsiders tend to have a more agile approach which can reap rewards.  So you need a mixture of expertise and new approach.  I think Deaton, an outsider with his unorthodox approach, has already contributed to forcing SEC to make errors which might well cost SEC dear when/if this case continues much longer.  

I think the law is much more emotional than making a strict reading of facts.  This is why we have judges and juries.  We expect a human perspective in law making and law enforcement.  We do not simply bow our heads and say you lot go into a room and work it all out and then tell us the answers.  Leaving things to experts is a really bad idea.  

Exactly!!! When it comes to digital assets at this point in the game who is really an expert???? Most so called experts are still being defined.

Edited by RikkiTikki_is_Back
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2021 at 9:02 PM, HAL1000 said:

As he said, if the SEC wins and XRP is ruled a security, then God help the rest of the crypto industry, THE SEC - INVESTOR PROTECTION IS OUR PRIMARY GOAL, their hypocrisy knows no bounds. What's the ultimate goal SEC to screw over EVERY retail crypto investor worldwide?

"Some Men Just Want To Watch The World Burn" don't they J Clayton or should we call you Joker, you both have the same inane grin!

SEC: "it's our job to look out for the little guy, the retail investor.  And by 'the little guy, the retail investor', of course we mean our own interests"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.