- Charles Hoskinson argues that he is completely against the SEC, dispelling rumors regarding his ETHGate theory definition.
- Previously, Hoskinson argued that the SEC’s stance on ETH is not a part of corruption but favoritism.
- Cardano’s founder received stark criticism alleging that he favored SEC’s corruption
The crypto space, fully open to controversies and scandals, recently caught attention with Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson’s contentious comments on the ETHGate Conspiracy Theory. In a recent AMA session on October 8, Hoskinson, who is also a co-founder of Ethereum, dispelled the ETHGate theory, arguing that the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) stance on Ether is not rooted in “corruption,” but an act of “favoritism.”
While his Ether-favored comments remain controversial, Hoskinson received a stack of criticism, alleging that his opinions sided with the regulator’s corruption. However, Hoskinson stood firm, dismissing rumors against him, claiming that he is “completely against” the SEC.
Hoskinson asserted that the rumor against him is a “great irony of conspiratorial thinking,” spreading like a “disease.” His tweet represented his disappointment in being involved in a rumor concerning Ethereum, a platform he left in 2014. Earlier today, Hoskinson shared a post on X (formerly Twitter) sharing a light-hearted comment, stating,
You know my favorite part about the holidays is kicking the XRP ETHGate Hornet’s nest with easy to meme sound bites connected to mostly ignored nuanced points. It’s like the first snow of winter.
Notably, the theory has been a result of the SEC’s long view of Ether as a non-security despite the fact that popular assets, including XRP, are deemed unregistered securities. As per the argument of prominent ETHGate theorists, including XRP attorney John E. Deaton, Ethereum had mysterious dealings with the SEC, compelling the regulators to exempt Ether from the federal securities law. However, dismissing any speculations on the conspiracy between Ethereum and the SEC, Hoskinson argued that Ether “got lucky to be too old to consider” as a security.
Adding to the controversy, Hoskinson affirmed that the XRP was different from Ether, the former posing little threat to the existence of the latter. Pointing out the difference between XRP and ETH, Hoskinson asserted, “It [XRP] didn’t have smart contracts, we were in the proof of workspace, we weren’t looking for bank or remittance relationships.”
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
