Wintermute CEO Argues Crypto Twitter ‘Doesn’t Play as Big a Role’ as ‘US Regulators, Politicians’ in Response to SBF Discourse
Wintermute CEO Evgeny Gaevoy took to Twitter on October 23rd to add comments to the discourse surrounding FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried and his intentions within the crypto industry. Gaevoy claimed that Crypto Twitter is a “tiny subset of the world” and “doesn’t matter.”
Gaevoy went on to say that “US regulators and policymakers as well as a broader user base matter a lot more” in an apparent attempt to push back against the argument that SBF is “going into some kind of rogue state.” a concept that Gaevoy said he found “silly”.
Thoughts on last sbf discourse 👇🏻
— wish cynic (@EvgenyGaevoy) 23 October 2022
SBF’s recent regulatory requirements
Recently, the State of Texas issued an investigation of FTX and SBF regarding unregistered security offerings. Following this announcement, the SBF took to Twitter to offer their thoughts on the future of crypto regulation.
1) As promised:
My current thoughts on crypto regulation.https://t.co/O2nG1VrW1l
— SBF (@SBF_FTX) 19 October 2022
SBF’s thoughts essentially consisted of a desire for “regulatory oversight and customer protection” and an “open, free economy.” Meanwhile, he argued that “standards” are necessary until proper regulation is installed. SBF also argued that the crypto industry should comply with OFAC sanctions in an FTX Policy post linked in the Twitter thread. OFAC sanctions have been at the heart of the Ethereum blockchain censorship debate recently, and SBF’s support “triggered” Crypto investor and CEO of ShapeShift, Eric Voorhees, in his own words.
Voorhees wrote an extended response to SBF in a Money and State blog post on October 20. In the post he stated that SBF,
“recognizes that decentralized code is speech and as such should not be regulated. But unfortunately he advocates any kind of regulation of the way normal people interact with such code.”
The SBF had argued that “BTC and ETH are not considered securities” in a statement calling for greater clarity on what defines a value in the crypto world. However, Shapeshift’s CEO, Voorhees, responded, in a sensational “rant” about the SEC, that
“Had Ethereum been explicitly classified as a security at the initial public sale, the SEC would have smothered one of the greatest world-changing inventions in human history in its bed.”
Voorhees strongly disagreed with SBF’s comments that his view of sanctions was “the path to tyranny, ubiquitous surveillance, and the worst dystopian, Orwellian financial system imaginable.”
“To the extent that someone proposes a rule via regulation, we should use a high degree of skepticism and caution, because they act without civility under the banner of violence.”
My answer to @SBF_FTX https://t.co/k0dmRDamJS#bitcoin #challenge #ethereum #crypto #freedom @ftx_app
— Erik Voorhees (@ErikVoorhees) 20 October 2022
The concept of protocol-level blockchain block addresses is something Voorhees strongly disagrees with, and which SBF suggested are “the right approach to sanctions compliance on blockchain environments.”
Wintermute and SBF discourse
Gaevoy’s comments came after those of Voorhees, and Gaevoy may well have been aware of Voorhees’ response given the public arena in which it was made. The Wintermute boss stated that he was “mostly in line with Erik Voorhees’ post” and that,
“The key differentiation between standards and regulations/laws is really key. While I’m not necessarily optimistic that we’ll get to dictate standards, at least we can try, can’t we?”
In response to the question of whether SBF is pushing for such a plan or appears to be shaping regulation solely to “fit FTX,” Gaevoy said, “we’ll know soon enough.” However, he claimed that in his meetings with the SBF he had gotten to know him well enough to say that he is not “a Palpatine”, referring to the SBF being related to a Star Wars movie villain. Gaevoy believes that we would “know now” if the SBF had bad intentions in its desire for more crypto regulation.
While Gaevoy’s comments may seem fairly neutral and semi-optimistic about the potential future of crypto, it’s disheartening to hear his thoughts that overall social media engagement “doesn’t matter.”
Gaevoy stated that along with “US regulators and politicians”, a “broader user base” means much more than Crypto Twitter. Parties outside the US are not mentioned, however, and the location of this “broader user base” is unknown.
Crypto Twitter is made up of some of the brightest minds in the blockchain space, along with many of the most savvy retail investors. The concept that these non-U.S. individuals and organizations are irrelevant to the discussion can be troubling to global investors.
To give Gaevoy the benefit of the doubt, the “larger user base” could include all projects, individuals and investors outside the United States. Still, such grouping may indicate an American bias from others in the crypto space.
