DennisonBertram

Just pulled a grail

Check out my Uniswap trading card 🦄

[drop yours here ‒ X won't let us do it for you 😢]

Folks are going to be pretty surprised when this time next year it's the US government that's defining decentralization.

1/ Just read @jchervinsky and @variantfund's thoughtful piece on "Tokens Versus Equity" - a framework for how crypto founders should think about value accrual in the new regulatory environment.

Core thesis: tokens for onchain value, equity for offchain value.

Thread: 🧵

11/ The most compelling insight: users value ownership, not governance. They want to own valuable onchain infrastructure, not vote on parameter changes.

This suggests protocols should optimize for sustainable value capture mechanisms rather than complex governance systems.

12/ Final thought: We're entering a new experimental phase for crypto. The old playbook of "launch token, walk away, hope DAOs figure it out" is dead.

The future belongs to founders who thoughtfully design value flows, minimize governance, and maximize tokenholder ownership. /end

6/ The "governance minimization" point resonates: automate everything possible, delegate specific powers when needed, but ensure tokenholders retain ultimate control.

Purpose-built structures like Wyoming DUNAs and tools like BORGs can help execute this vision effectively.

7/ The "one-asset model" is particularly intriguing - all value onchain, no equity. Projects like @MorphoLabs are pioneering this approach.

Advantages: perfect alignment, singular focus on protocol competitiveness. Challenge: regulatory uncertainty remains.

8/ Important distinction: avoid "company-backed tokens" like FTT that represent claims on offchain revenue. These create power asymmetries where holders are at the company's mercy - precisely what securities law addresses.

True tokens = direct ownership of digital property.

9/ Open questions remain:
- Can governance be eliminated entirely without triggering securities laws?
- How should one-asset model startups fund initial development?
- Should some tokens just be treated as onchain securities with modernized regulation?

The map isn't the territory.

10/ My take: This framework offers clarity in a murky landscape. The onchain/offchain distinction is intuitive and aligns with crypto's ethos of transparency and self-sovereignty.

But execution will be key - especially navigating the transition period as regulation evolves.

3/ The post identifies 3 major problems with the current model:

- Misaligned incentives (companies focus on equity, not tokens)
- Ineffective governance (DAOs struggle with protocol development)
- Unresolved legal risk (SEC still investigates despite compliance attempts)

4/ The proposed solution is elegant: design products so value flows onchain where tokenholders have direct ownership.

Examples: fee burning (EIP-1559), onchain treasuries, IP licensing, DeFi front-end fees routed onchain.

If it's transparent & auditable onchain → tokens.

5/ A key insight: tokens aren't securities because they convey powers over onchain infrastructure, not rights tied to a legal entity.

Like owning property with a property manager - you depend on their efforts but retain ultimate control. The property exists independently.

1/ Just read @variantfund's thoughtful piece on "Tokens Versus Equity" - a framework for how crypto founders should think about value accrual in the new regulatory environment.

The core thesis: tokens for onchain value, equity for offchain value.

Thread on key insights: 🧵

2/ The historical context is crucial: ICOs promised tokens as the sole value-accruing asset, but SEC pressure forced founders into an awkward hybrid model - raising equity privately, then distributing tokens with limited ability to drive value to them.

This created misalignment.

This whole Zohran thing has really opened my eyes to how much of a backwater bubble crypto twitter has become.

I was just at a coffee shop, general attitude was that Zohran was the obvious choice, and that everyone is trying to understand and use AI better.

When I asked about crypto i was shocked by how much of a “do people even do that anymore?” Attitude folks had.

Where are these people hanging out? They aren’t on Twitter. Is there some new platform? Are they even using social the same anymore? Is their social actually many different things?

Yeah, the world is totally different out there. We are crazy out of sync.

To all the bros on crypto twitter in love with their homies but afraid to come out:

Happy Pride!

Live your truth Anon. Life’s too short.

The biggest problem of @dappcon_berlin and @safe con is that it’s just too good.

Too high quality.

Too high signal.

Too many top tier discussions.

I’m exhausted! I can’t keep up!

And there is still @UniswapFND gov swap and zuBerlin?!?!?

I'm speaking today at DappCon at 10:40am on regulatory updates coming to the US and how they impact Governance.

We will also be launching today a new tool to help founders keep up with changes in US regulation to help you stay prepared.

http://www.cryptoclarity.us

@tallyxyz

I am thinking to write a memoir of my time in crypto, thinking to call it “The Way We Live Now”