ETHGate – a big scandal or just a rumor?

Steven Nerayoff, a large investor during the cryptocurrency's initial offering Ethereum for years he has been claiming that it is American Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has been corrupted by Ethereum and has evidence to prove it. More famous names join him, and the eruption of the scandal has a new basis: the people behind Ethereum were to bribe the SEC so that the commission would sue the company Ripple for placing on the market XRP tokens, which are ETH's competitors. The commission also allegedly released Ethereum from regulatory oversight in exchange for bribes.

The evidence for such claims is – for some indirect, for others very strong. However, it is undoubtedly true that Vitalik Buterin, the creator and main "brain" of Ethereum, emailed Bill Hinman from the SEC even before his speech, which made an important statement that the ETH cryptocurrency is not considered securities. Does the contact itself constitute corruption or even favoritism? Most people call it a scandal, regardless of what was in the emails.

However, not everyone's assessment of this fact is so clear.

"The SEC has been corrupted by Ethereum"

Steven Nerayoff, who is one of the first large investors during the Ethereum ICO, argues that the SEC was corrupt. He keeps repeating that he has hard evidence for this and will soon reveal it in full. Especially since - in his opinion - the very fact that the SEC had any relations with Ethereum is an obvious conflict of interest between the regulator and the entity it is supposed to control.

Steven Nerayoff's supporter is also a legal expert John Deaton, who claims that he has seen this evidence and it is indisputable. He can't even wait to show them off.

So everyone is waiting for Bill Himman's hearing. John Deaton is convinced that it will have "epic consequences" because he will have so much ammunition in court that he will need nothing more for a devastating victory.

“Ethereum Is Favored by the SEC”

However, not everyone is so decisive in their rhetoric. He also joined the game Charles Hoskinson, which says that the disclosed e-mails are evidence, but only of unequal treatment of market entities by the SEC. However, he does not call it corruption, but "problematic favoritism".

It is worth noting that Charles Hoskinson is one of the co-founders of Ethereum. However, he left the company after he came out with the thesis that Ethereum should be a for-profit company, not a non-profit organization. The remaining band members did not agree to this and went their separate ways. According to unconfirmed information, Hoskinson was even forced to leave Ethereum.

On the one hand, he may still hold a grudge against his former colleagues and look for opportunities for revenge, but on the other hand, he may still be emotionally and financially tied to the project and may want to whitewash it...

On the X platform (formerly Twitter), most commentators tend to favor the latter version. The prevailing belief among people involved in the cryptocurrency market is that such a delicate content of the statement results from friendly and financial affinities, which are still at a high level. There are even accusations that Charles Hoskinson may be involved in it himself and is simply trying to defend himself in advance.

For most commentators, there is no big difference between favoritism and corruption. Especially if it involves a government agency that - at least in theory - should guard the iron legal rules that govern the world of big money.