I had to explain this to a friend today, thought a diagram might help.
I find this to be a super-effective way to get legal advice and feel confident about it.
Advice on advisors
4 years ago by jacobgadikian
764.56 BLURT
21 votes $1.10- Past Payouts 764.56 BLURT
- - Author 382.28 BP
- - Curators 382.27 BP
For example, this process was used to discern that "Well, to the best of my knowledge (keep in mind no one has ever done what you're doing before-- good atty will always hedge in this fashion, and that is okay-- law is ambiguous) Blurt is not a security. But maybe I don't know quite what it is. What do you think it is?"
3/3 INFORMALLY consulted attys agree: blurt not likely a secuurity under US law.
3/3 agree: US law doesn't know what blurt is yet, they reckon
3/3 inquire: what do you reckon blurt is?
:P
PPS: No, there is no legal anything going on re: blurt.
Just thought the process might be interesting to the community, I like it,.
I doubt laws will catch up with the likes of BLURT even for another 5 years.
PS: I thought it would be great for BLURT to have a polling DAPP. It's just something that came to my mind while posting on BLURT. There is already open source code of https://github.com/emre/dpoll.xyz I'm not a developer. So I don't know how this will work out or how difficult the implementation would be. I'm just throwing this here as an idea.