📅 Participate in STA Annual Conference

[JFWooten4]

In chatting with industry participant representatives this morning, it's become abundantly clear that few are materially familiar with our ongoing efforts. I believe we're¹ generally familiar with how some efforts to participate in this forum went on an individual basis. However, now that we have the Association and, more aspirationally, the 501(c)(3) status, I think it should be relatively simple to participate at this industry event.

Material Prior Work

According to the public schedule from last year, participants discussed a wide array of important topics. The large majority of this information is, unfortunately, not available online. That is, there are particularly few methods available to uncover regulatory and oversight conversations happening around these discussions.²

Advanced Notice

I was personally hit with shock and astounded by the DTCC "web3 hub" discussed last year. This release might have been something we could have heard about a full week before the public, allowing us more time to prepare a response to the announcement. Moreover, we could have spoken directly with representatives as to the technical specifications and design considerations considered, giving us a particularly unique perspective on industry "enhancements."³

Spread Innovation

As with the upcoming SFVegas chat, they reserved the last panel for a discussion on introducing "blockchain, automated processes, and the potential progression of the SEC."⁴ This is our chance to champion a system built to empower transfer agents, offering faster reporting, easier share issuance, and a way to future-proof operations without disrupting current workflows.

Continued Growth

I know it's a closed-room event. It's not the kind of thing I like to support.² But it is sort of the only option when it comes to a diverse array of agent perspectives. For now. After material advocacy over the years, this sort of consortium should be much easier for us, as we'll be a reputable, known Association. Heck, some of these event sponsors might even support us.⁵

Footnotes

1. The existing community. ↩

2. The most direct path would be retaining a law firm common amongst other industry participants, of which I am not familiar. A lesser feed could be the Shareholder Optimizer, but I do not believe that publication contains this sort of proprietary internal data or perspectives. ↩ ↩²

3. What's the Sun Tzu quote? "If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat." ↩

4. Albeit quoted maliciously. 😈 The text thereafter should not see the light of day given this new administration. ↩

5. In charading around for the Syndicate, I met with some of the financial backers of event sponsors. It'd be a relatively trivial jump to expand the conversation to higher-level industry benefits. I'm particularly more concerned about the brokerage fraud and waste over the rudimentary accounting function between agents and issuers. ↩

[tehchives]

Yes, I'd very much like to have some kind of appearance there - or at the least, get these ideas and concepts into the minds of the people who will be gathered in that space, as they are among those perhaps most primed to quickly understand the potential of what has been worked on here. I would be honored and interested to go there myself.

[bobmahalo]

if the timing works out work wise it would be awesome if a pair went. John and chives, or 6days and John, or 6days and chives? you guys have a really good handle on the purpose of DRS and can answer a wide array of questions and misinformation. I would love a chives David Webb interview, but I am drifting off subject.

[JFWooten4]

I know 6days tried it before, and that sounds like an incredible dynamic duo if I had to whittle it down.

Interview sounds like an exceptional idea,¹ pending a TS issue as soon as we can make that one happen! If it helps, the geography this year looks like Naples, FL.

Footnotes

1. Just in terms of their personalities, I think they would really mesh well as an outlooker. ↩