Ripple's Acquisition of Crypto-Focused Chartered Trust Company Fortress Trust
Immutable Introduces zkEVM Testnet on Web3 Gaming Platform to Enhance Infrastructure Diversity
Neal Stephenson's Metaverse Concept Takes a Leap Forward with the Launch of Lamina1 Blockchain Betanet
Two crypto-related newsletters have been removed from Mailchimp's platform, according to Decrypt. This is the most recent in a lengthy line of suspensions that date back at least to 2018.
Unqualified Opinions by Ryan Selkis, a daily summary of information obtained from his cryptocurrency data company Messari, as well as an announcements/marketing email by wallet service Edge, have been taken down from the internet.
"Thank you for [d]eplatforming some of crypto's most reputable brands in the past 48 hours," Selkis tweeted at Mailchimp on Wednesday. "You're proving our point. Mailchimp – and all speech censors – must be destroyed."
Cryptocurrency holds a dangerous position in the minds of the general public. On the one hand, it represents the cutting edge of finance and technology, the new "disruptor" that has the potential to transform our antiquated, sclerotic institutions.
On the other side, it is a sector that is properly demonized as a cesspool of fraud and con artists. It robs people of their money, eats up electricity, and spreads like a virus. Beyond more complicated phrases and self-justifications, it has made a lot of promises but achieved very little.
The general public's understanding of crypto is therefore fragmented. The media's portrayal of the sector is utterly irrational; the same outlet that might run a headline like "This woman quit her job to focus on cryptocurrency full-time and amass 'generational riches' the next month will then declare it dead.
It's not particularly shocking when organizations like Mailchimp, which is a subsidiary of the industry leader in tax software Intuit, take a stance against cryptocurrency. Particularly when some of the industry's strongest supporters have turned become its sharpest detractors, suddenly changing allegiances based on the price of bitcoin.
Selkis attacked Mailchimp for the abrupt about-face, and from a commercial standpoint, he is probably right that his criticism of the company's behavior is warranted. He has used the email service for the previous four years, sending emails nearly every day of the week, but he can no longer even access his subscriber list. He claims that neither a warning nor an explanation were provided.
Others also booted
However, in the spirit of neutrality, "cryptocurrencies, virtual currencies, and other digital assets associated to an initial coin offering" are expressly included as "prohibited content" under Mailchimp's acceptable use policy. It has a track record of upholding such policy. The media firms Decrypt, Breaker, and Blockworks as well as the cryptocurrency exchange ShapeShift have been denied services.
These instances of "censorship" are frequently cited by persons working in or supporting the crypto industry as justification. The need for open, permissionless networks is obvious if anyone can be "shadowbanned" by Twitter or banned from an email service. Or, as Selkis put it in reference to the famous imperial conflicts between Rome and Carthage, "Web2 delenda est" (it must be destroyed).
Moments like this can serve as cautionary tales, but they can also serve as helpful reminders that no one owes anything to cryptocurrency. When caught cheating another man's game, a sector that is frequently accused of making up its own rules can't truly call foul.
It is saddening that anti-crypto slacktivists can sabotage crypto projects at organizations like Wikipedia or the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which should support the open-source ethos of crypto. Can you blame other businesses for seeking to reduce risk and restrict their dealings with cryptocurrencies, though?
Evidently, Web3 has a solution for every problem with Web2. There are rival social media networks, native publication platforms for cryptocurrencies, etc. Legacy brands that believe there is a real commercial case for cryptocurrencies are heading in that direction and experimenting. (Recently, significant blockchain initiatives were announced by Tiffany, Reddit, and BlackRock.)
I don't see much value in arguing that crypto is a "Trojan Horse" Web2 that seeks to subvert these already existing networks by utilizing them. In my opinion, it is at least a contributing factor to why people are so unclear about what cryptocurrency is.
Is cryptocurrency just this ethereal topic you discuss on podcasts, in emails, or on Discord? Or is there really a shift in the balance of power? If crypto's supporters utilized the platforms they profess to favor, things might be more evident.
