@QuantNetworkDev And THAT is an accurate summary as to the issues the SEC has with Ripple.

@QuantNetworkDev，这是对SEC与Ripple之间问题的准确总结。

@QuantNetworkDev Meaning to or not, Ripple *assumed* responsibility and directly profited from it and at times arguably against the best interests of those who own the token be it in a first or second sale.

@QuantNetworkDev的意思是，Ripple*承担了责任，并直接从中获利，有时可能会损害代币所有者的最佳利益，无论是在第一次还是第二次销售中。

@QuantNetworkDev The contract is in the fiduciary responsibility of maintaining consensus COUPLED with the responsibility to market price assumed in complete control of the circulating supply.

@QuantNetworkDev本合同的受托人责任是维护共识，并承担完全控制流通供应的市场价格责任。

@QuantNetworkDev So if they control supply, control consensus (albeit through financially compensated intermediaries), and control the brand … three strikes and you’re out.
That passes the Howey test and much of the discussion is irrelevant to anything.

@QuantNetworkDev因此，如果他们控制供应、控制共识（尽管是通过经济补偿的中介机构），并控制品牌……三次打击，你就出局了。
它通过了豪伊测试，而且大部分讨论与任何事情都无关。

@QuantNetworkDev In a sense, I would say that. Sure. That’s the market landscape and always has been.
We know they satisfied one prong of Howey: promotions and marketing.
How do we know this?
They changed the brand name of the network and they own the trademark to “XRP”.

@从某种意义上来说，我可以这么说。当然这就是市场前景，而且一直如此。
我们知道他们满足了Howey的一个方面：促销和营销。
我们怎么知道的？
他们更改了网络的品牌名称，并将其商标改为“XRP”。

@QuantNetworkDev The XRP community has been manipulated and lied to by the likes of David Schwartz and I find it deplorable.

@XRP社区被大卫·施瓦茨这样的人操纵和欺骗，我觉得这很可悲。

@QuantNetworkDev If the SEC is incorrect then that billion dollar ecosystem shouldn’t be impacted by a suit against Ripple.
The folks who argue don’t realize they are arguing a self evident truth.

@QuantNetworkDev如果SEC是错误的，那么数十亿美元的生态系统不应该受到针对Ripple的诉讼的影响。
争论的人没有意识到他们争论的是一个不言而喻的事实。

@QuantNetworkDev Consensus method matters but as a function of fiduciary responsibility which may or may not indicate one or more prongs of the Howey test. That is indisputable and a reason for the term “true cryptocurrency”.

@QuantNetworkDev共识方法很重要，但作为信托责任的一种功能，它可能或可能不表明Howey测试的一个或多个分支。这是无可争辩的，也是“真正的加密货币”一词的由来。

@QuantNetworkDev Regarding the XRP community, they have changed a lot since the days moms and their kids used the network. I don’t think the changes have been positive either. The changes in the community justify the SECs opinion.

@QuantNetworkDev关于XRP社区，自从妈妈和孩子们使用网络以来，他们已经改变了很多。我认为这些变化也不是积极的。社区的变化证明了SECs的观点是正确的。

@PpleaseXr Yeah. Absolutely. That’s why XRP is unlike any other network except XLM and they took steps which reveal how centralized XRP truly is.

@是的。绝对地这就是为什么XRP不同于除XLM之外的任何其他网络，他们采取了一些步骤，揭示了XRP真正的集中化程度。

@QuantNetworkDev The views are not only not opposing but are completely consistent with SEC actions in crypto up to and including the SEC lawsuit. No facts have ever been given which should mean XRP need be treated like ETH or BTC when it shares nothing in common with them.

@QuantNetworkDev这些观点不仅不反对，而且与SEC在加密领域的行动完全一致，直到并包括SEC的诉讼。没有任何事实表明XRP需要像ETH或BTC一样对待，因为它与ETH或BTC没有任何共同之处。

@QuantNetworkDev You need not apologize. I did call them morons. I attacked them. They also did not prove my statement incorrect.
It is those who offer false hope by manipulating facts out of context who truly abuse them. Not me.

@QuantNetworkDev你不需要道歉。我确实叫他们白痴。我攻击了他们。他们也没有证明我的说法是错误的。
那些断章取义地操纵事实，提供虚假希望的人，才是真正滥用事实的人。不是我。

@QuantNetworkDev No comparison to any other network need be made EXCEPT in existing legal precedent. There is existing precedent at the time the SEC sued and it does apply.
That means nothing for anyone else but XRP and Ripple. Drawing comparisons to other networks is logically invalid.

@QuantNetworkDev除现有法律先例外，无需与任何其他网络进行比较。SEC起诉时已有先例，而且确实适用。
除了XRP和Ripple，这对其他任何人都没有意义。将图形与其他网络进行比较在逻辑上是无效的。

@QuantNetworkDev Without Ripple specifically being involved specifically as they have been there would be NO reason to call XRP a security.
None. However, Ripple cannot be divorced from XRP in this manner.
So to take them out of the equation is impossible.

@QuantNetworkDev没有Ripple的参与，没有理由称XRP是安全的。
没有一个然而，Ripple不能以这种方式与XRP分离。
所以要把它们从等式中去掉是不可能的。

@QuantNetworkDev There is no XRP in circulation that did not first come from a sale of those tokens by Ripple. One cannot mine or stake XRP, nor can one earn XRP via operating a node and collecting fees. The only way to truly know circulation is via the ledger and the first 32000 entries are gone

@QuantNetworkDev流通中没有XRP不是首先来自Ripple出售这些代币。不能开采或投资XRP，也不能通过运营节点和收取费用来赚取XRP。真正了解流通情况的唯一方法是通过分类账，前32000条分录消失了

@QuantNetworkDev First, thank you for being the first person to attempt a coherent argument.
There’s a lot in there so allow me a few tweets to dive in to respond.

@QuantNetworkDev首先，感谢您成为第一个尝试连贯性论证的人。
这里面有很多东西，所以请允许我发几条推文来回应。

@HODLmaxi @NVXRP1 @TheXRPness @a16z It is clear. It’s clearly intentionally deceptive to fool stupid people.

@HODLmaxi@NVXRP1@TheXRPness@a16z很清楚。愚弄愚蠢的人显然是故意的欺骗。

@TheXRPness @NVXRP1 @HODLmaxi @a16z Look who my followers are.
Reporters and blue checks.
People read my feed like news, not fanboi opinions.

@xrpness@NVXRP1@HODLmaxi@a16z看看我的追随者是谁。
记者和蓝支票。
人们读我的feed就像读新闻一样，而不是fanboi的观点。

@NVXRP1 @TheXRPness @HODLmaxi @a16z First valid point made. Unfortunately ETC and the migration between them tends to soften the blow of that argument.

@NVXRP1@TheXRPness@HODLmaxi@a16z提出了第一个有效的观点。不幸的是，ETC和它们之间的迁移倾向于减轻这一论点的打击。

@TheXRPness @NVXRP1 @HODLmaxi @a16z Asked and answered.

@XRPNESS@NVXRP1@HODLmaxi@a16z问道，然后回答。