Guess I missed that one 
Likewise my feelings are amicable and you caught me in a different frame of mind yesterday as I'd got caught up arguing with fools and had let myself get brought down to their level.
Likewise my feelings are amicable and you caught me in a different frame of mind yesterday as I'd got caught up arguing with fools and had let myself get brought down to their level.Emotions affect everyone and it seems they are always flying high on these forums and the shit is flying all over the place (the more dung the merrier right). Any way, I try as much as possible to keep myself focused on extracting the factual conclusions of discussions, i.e. the useful information that can aid my work.
You'd pointed to Dash specifically at one point and I'd still argue the infeasibility of prosecution on that kind of scale, its at most 3.2k responsible for decision making at the moment but add third party services that allow any amount to take part in an MN and it's potentially every user in the system, add the complications of worldwide distribution, anonymity and hosting in countries with no such laws and its completely impractical to enforce.
One very incriminating question is whether Evan (and any others) conspired to instamine what I understand was basically greater than 50% of the money supply as of the time that the masternodes were created. And thus given the recent chart showing Dash's protocol is paying up to 50% per annum return on the coins locked up while running a masternode, then it means basically their conspiratorial group could control greater than 50% of the masternodes and money supply right now, and thus very much control the coin. If it ever goes to court then most certainly forensic evidence will be applied and I understand some others are fairly certain they can prove beyond any reasonable doubt the culpability. I haven't dug into that evidence so I can't offer my opinion on the veracity of those claims. And going off on that tangent of proving something about Dash is off-topic to this thread.
Notwithstanding even if it was impossible to prove sufficient control over the masternodes by Evan and other conspirators, it would still be the case that Evan and his group used funds extracted from the common share of the tokens in managing the common enterprise and the community follows their managerial control. Thus per my understanding of USA securities law, Evan's group is managing unregistered investment securities and thus are liable to be in prison for a long time. I really pity him at this point. Perhaps he got himself into something he didn't realize and now can't easily extract himself from it. Evan stated that he comes from the financial industry, so one would ponder that maybe he should have known better.
Unless Evan has connections with the SEC and others in the financial industry that can protect him, based on my recent research linked from the OP of this thread, I think he has a world of hurt ahead of him. I do believe the authorities are just letting these scams pile up on top of each other, so they can bring a wave of massive regulation once the economy turns down hard in 2017 or 2018. The authorities will become very motivated once the economy goes south.
I don't personally have any vendetta nor need to bury Dash with my words. You raised the issue, so I am responded honestly as to what I believe to be the facts as I know them.
Again, the SR case was a good example. That was a one-off, the cost of enforcing the law was way too high in both funds and revealing methods so it was more a face-saving exercise than procedure and the penalties and questionable legalities of the case where evidence of that.
What is the "SR case"?
