The community of cryptocurrency enthusiasts is probably one of the most fun and welcoming on social media, however every now and then fierce controversies break out that take on gigantic proportions when some of the members who enjoy greater visibility are involved; it happened again these days, following a controversy started by Vitalil Buterin, the inventor of ethereum (for the uninitiated). In fact, Buterin deemed it necessary to respond to criticism against the platform on its centralized nature and to do so he attacked another platform, BTSE, from the front; Vitalik in particular highlighted how foolish and useless it is to attack a platform like ethereum due to its presumed centralized nature, while the same people who advance this type of criticism do not say a single word about other projects that have only the name of decentralization. In his tweets, Buterin brought up the BTSE platform directly, which made marketing director Lina Seiche feel obliged to intervene. La Seiche did not go down lightly, remarking how it is unacceptable that we continue to describe ethereum as a decentralized platform when it clearly is not, which, however, should not be understood, according to the BTSE marketing manager, nor as one much less criticism as an insult.
Lina Seiche then wanted to put the dots on the i stating that it is ethereum to be presented as a decentralized platform, without it really being, while BTSE, which uses a Bitcoin blockchain sidechain for its new token sale, is never was advertised as a decentralized platform; in other words, Seiche has highlighted how the problem is not so much whether a project is decentralized or not, but the way it is presented which, in certain circumstances, appears to be fraudulent. This is roughly what happened and, frankly, I find the discussion as exciting as a cock fight in an overcrowded chicken coop; when many argue that the world of cryptocurrencies still needs to mature a lot we also mean this, it is not acceptable that people who have such a great visibility in the community end up catching fish in the face of each other in public, something that is not even then so rare. It would therefore be appropriate for everyone to realize that most of the time it is preferable to drop certain provocations than to provoke a ruckus via social media that inevitably ends up attracting the attention of even those who are foreign to this world and who might decide to stay it still very long thanks to these indecorous shows. It is even irrelevant within certain terms whether a project is more or less decentralized, just as it would be appropriate to respect the intelligence of the community and let individuals decide what they think without trying to influence them; otherwise, the feeling is that an attempt is being made to contend for the liquidity on the market with blows under the belt, thus opening up a series of reflections on the market which instead of attracting new users only keeps them away. Have you ever seen, for example, the CEOs of two competing banks arguing like kids on social media? Rarely. Of course, even in the banking world occasionally a few words fly too many, but these are rare cases, in principle the banks are careful not to step on each other's feet; the reason is simple and I think anyone understands it, if the CEO of a bank started roaring on social media that a competing bank is cheating account holders to get out of it demolished it would be the whole banking system. It would therefore be the case that someone took the trouble to explain to these guys that we are now in 2020, that cryptocurrencies have existed for more than 11 years and that if we want this sector to grow again perhaps it is the case that the people working on the various projects stop discrediting each other.