Given recent events with the @SEC_News v @Ripple, and the documents filed, I would like to make it known that I run my own XRP validator, without permission from anyone and have never had any influence from Ripple, ever.
1/6
1/6
It is also important to note that I was invited to have my validator added to Ripples UNL which I accepted. There were no requirements, nothing signed, nothing promised, nothing given. Purely voluntary and no guarantees I'll remain on it.
2/6
2/6
What is important here is that EVERY validator has a CHOICE as to what UNL their validator runs and can make up their own list. I know of other UNL lists that exist and I had my own one prior to being added to Ripples UNL.
3/6
3/6
@Ripple do not define the dUNL and do not control it - EACH validator individually chooses which UNL their validator runs. Most just choose Ripples suggested UNL as they believe the trust they have in those validators has been proven sufficiently.
4/6
4/6
If there was sufficient overlap of validators choosing an alternative UNL that were greater than those validators operating with the Ripple UNL then Ripple's UNL would no longer be the default on which the XRPL would depend. Ripple would have no control of that.
5/6
5/6
All the power is with XRPL validators of which Ripple has a minority stake.
A ripple validator has no more power with regard the XRPL than does mine or any other validator.
@alloynetworks @WietseWind @XRPL_rabbit @DigifinUK @xrpscan @bithomp @TowoLabs et al
6/6
A ripple validator has no more power with regard the XRPL than does mine or any other validator.
@alloynetworks @WietseWind @XRPL_rabbit @DigifinUK @xrpscan @bithomp @TowoLabs et al
6/6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
