RE: Why SMTs are not a distraction but a necessity
When did I ever say Steemit Inc should do legal counseling? What a bizarre reply to a comment I never made.
And it's not a matter of "fear". It's a matter of being organized so that if you want a bunch of ICOs or token sales that it can be done in a compliant way so that people can make money over Steem and actually keep it. You cannot grow an ecosystem if most of the money goes to legal fees and fines.
Lawyers and similar need to sell a token we can all buy for their services. This way speculation on the risk of a crackdown can cause people to buy the tokens in advance if they feel they might need them. The big issue is going to be there could be a shortage of lawyers to go to. The other issue is the cost of the lawyers is so damn high that we all have an incentive to reduce the cost of the legal fees using the Steemit technology if possible.
Please respond to my argument and not a phantom argument.
Implying that it would be their job to tell you all the regulatory risks of SMTs.
I don't need to imply. I was talking about lawyers in these comments who usually post when anyone mentions ICOs. Suddenly they aren't around?
And yes I do think while Steemit doesn't have to do anything to mitigate the risks it is still appropriate for Steemit to warn about the risks. It is what I would do if I were running the company because people need to know and weigh the pros and cons.