Fair enough. One reason I care is because @lasseehlers can ruin the second layer of Hive single-handedly and I would love for @lasseehlers to have a redemption arc. I don't think that @lasseehlers' redemption will ever happen but I would love for @lasseehlers to become better and prove me wrong.

I don't think Hive-Engine tokens are security tokens. I believe I could make a good argument for that. However, if I were in a debate and I had to argue the opposite that H-E tokens are securities I am confident I could make a strong case by just using Lassecash as my foundation. I would point to every single time in a post @lasseehlers refers to Lassecash as a "product". I would cite every post where @lasseehlers tries to pump Lassecash by alluding to future price growth of Lassecash. The pattern I've laid out in my post would be just the frosting on the cake to make Hive-Engine tokens look bad.

If I can argue it as a layperson then the SEC can do even better and eviscerate Lassecash and quite possibly bring down Hive-Engine with it. I don't like that and @lasseehlers doesn't take regulation seriously because he thinks his anarchist philosophy is some kind of defense or excuse.