Wrap Private Company Application: Fill & Download for Free

*I am not affiliated with Enjin team, and they haven’t sponsored this post. Always do your own research and don’t take this writing as investment advice.Before we start I’d like to say thank you team for leaving your feedback in our QIC group on how to make coin review articles even better. All your suggestions considered and here’s the first coin with the updated structure.Quick skim of a new structure: Idea, Reach, Use cases, Competitors, Progress, People, Backed by, Partnerships, Tokenomics, and Price projection. As usual, I’ll leave my comments in the end.Alright, ENJ here. Probably you’re all familiar with this project already, but I think it’s high time to update it and look a bit deeper “under its skin”.Let’s start!IdeaThe Enjin Coin itself is an ERC-20 token and smart contract platform that gives tools for implementing and managing virtual goods. It aims to provide such benefits as buying & selling items with no risk of fraud, trading between gaming items from different games, taking your currency with you across any community or game, and much more.ReachEnjin, the company that developed the Enjin Coin, has long been the largest online gaming community creation platform. Even before the creation of the Enjin Coin the company had over 60 million monthly pageviews, 19 million registered users, and 300,000 gaming webpages.Use casesUsers can truly own their virtual items and use, trade, buy, sell, lend, rent, lease, upgrade, and augment them securely across all games and platforms that support token.Developers can issue custom tokens, unique items, or privilege tokens (e.g., special access to certain areas of the game), all backed by Enjin coins.CompetitorsEnjin Coin’s largest competitors are GameCredits and WAX, but none of them is even close to the progress and reach ENJ achieved since ICO.ProgressAlthough it’s still a relatively young project, the team spent the last quarter of 2017 building the Platform API, Mobile Smart Wallet, and a Java SDK alongside creating a Minecraft plugin.ENJ team was active in 2018 as well and created various platform plugins, Efinitiy, numerous other SDKs, and the EnjinX blockchain explorer.2019 brought Enjin a partnership with Samsung and Microsoft. In June the multi-token standard ERC-1155 that enables the ability to issue mixed fungible and non-fungible tokens inside of one smart contract was adopted as Official Ethereum Token Standard.Enjin 2020 achievementsEnjin was adopted by Binance Academy Collectibles, Evershare, Chiliz&Socios, MyMetaverse and others.The Enjin Platform went live on Ethereum Mainnet.The Enjin SDK for Java went live.Listed and supported by Cryptocom, Swissborg Wealth App, Bancor V2, Voyager, Aave Protocol, Coinbase Custody, Binance FuturesPartnered with Atari, Coincheck, Fabricant, MakerDaoEnjin Launches Free Version of NFT Minting and Integration PlatformPeopleHeadquartered in Singapore, the Enjin team consists of a savvy crew spread across five continents and a dozen countries.Maxim Blagov is the CEO and co-founder of the Enjin Coin cryptocurrency project for more than 12 years, and this is his first crypto project.Witek Radomski, CTO & co-founder, leads Enjin Coin development, implementation, and integration for more than 11 years.Caleb Applegate is a COO. You may already be familiar with Caleb’s gaming company, Mineplex, one of the world’s largest Minecraft gaming servers and an official Minecraft partner. Caleb has worked on numerous development projects, films, and commercial productions as a Hollywood-based film producer.Advisors to the project consist of Anthony Diiorio (Ethereum co-founder) and Pat LaBine (previous producer and technical director at Bioware).Backed byIn 2019 Blockchain Ventures the VC fund of crypto company Blockchain.com has made an equity investment into Enjin.PartnershipsEnjin has received global recognition from multinational companies such as Microsoft and Samsung. It has also formed partnerships with Unity, PC Gamer, and NRG eSports.TokenomicsEnjin Coin project utilizes the deflationary model, meaning that no tokens will ever be added to the max cap, only unlocked from it. Currently, 82% of the total tokens are in circulation.Project revenueEnjin makes money on fees from Marketplace and on transfers of user’s assets (Tradesmith, Multiverse Platform).The team also profits on Mainnet platform subscriptions, Mintshop minting services, and other relevant applications.As a private company, Enjin does not disclose its revenue.Price ProjectionENJ is a leader in its segment, hence it’s quite hard to project its market cap and compare it with more successful competitors.Wrapping things upENJ is among the least projects that have truly clear, understandable, and in-demand use cases.Unlike many other projects that received huge funding on ICO, ENJ managed to make it into the top gaming projects in crypto.As a big believer that the gaming industry will be at the forefront of the wide adoption of crypto, I’ve included ENJ into my portfolio and despite the huge price increase since the beginning of the year, I’ll still be holding it.I welcome you to discuss ENJ in our Quora Inner Circle chat. Let me know what you like and especially what you dislike about ENJ.See you around!

“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free”― Johann Wolfgang Von GoetheThis is the quote that came to mind when I read this question. Understand that I only mean it in the most polite sense when I say that that sort of ignorance makes me embarrassed to call myself an American.First, how do we define freedom? To many in the United States, gun ownership seems to be the defining factor.I’ve heard so many Americans argue that gun ownership in America prevents tyranny and that it stands in the way of a totalitarian and oppressive government. Please, give me a break. Our government is one of the most oppressive, warmongering sources of evil in the entire developed world. The only thing separating us from an African banana republic is that we still have some residual legitimacy left over from World War II and the US Dollar is still (but probably not for long) the de facto gold standard of the world. If you were going to revolt and stage a revolution against a corrupt and oppressive government which taxes and regulates everything you should have done it years ago. The time has already come and passed and of course, Americans did nothing and never will.So what besides gun ownership defines personal freedom? Do we pay lower taxes?No, I would argue that our taxes are just as high as many European countries, and possibly even higher when one actually looks at the entire system as a whole and counts the layer upon layer upon layer of Federal, Payroll, State, Property, Sales, Inflation, licensing, Registration, Fees and other miscellaneous taxes that the average American pays. We are just better at hiding and denying our true tax rates. Many Americans don’t even consider Social Security to be a tax, but it is, and it’s a very stiff and regressive tax at that. Maybe you’ll get something for it, maybe you won’t. Social Security exists at the whim of whatever corrupt donkey or elephant happens to occupy the filthy streets of Washington at the time. Who knows? You are however losing the opportunity cost of investing that money over the course of your life, potentially costing you millions of dollars in lost capital gains. The poor and middle class pay all of it on every penny of their earnings while those earning long term capital gains as their primary income source do not. I’m not advocating higher taxes on anyone either. We pay enough already.Property rights?Do you really “own” your property in America? Try not paying your property taxes for a while and see how secure your property rights actually are. Even if your property is fully paid off you will ALWAYS rent it from the government. I dare you to try to defend it with your beloved guns too. Ask the Branch Davidians in Waco, or Cliven Bundy in Nevada how that went for them. If the US government wants it, they can and will take it.What if a private company wants your property? If Federal/state/local government decides that your property could be better used by someone else, not even for vital infrastructure…..just because……. they can and will exercise their right to sieze it through eminent domain. Check out the supreme court ruling Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469Can you do anything you want with your property? Absolutely not. Most parts of the US have extremely tyrannical zoning boards that determine what you can and can't do with your property. Want to open a storefront on your property? Nope, not zoned for it. Want to add a deck to your home? Not unless the local politburos say you can and issue you a permit, which of course you have to pay for.In Europe, zoning and land use restrictions are actually far less restrictive in many places. This is why you often see “mixed-use” areas that are highly walkable with intermixed residential and commercial that are easily served by effective public transport.In the US, the tyrants at the county tell you where you are allowed to build and not build like a giant communist utopia, and yet we have the nerve to accuse the Europeans of being “socialists.”Free to travel at will?Nothing screams freedom in America quite like the vast interstate highway system with no public alternatives. Just smell the freedom as you get in your vehicle and drive wherever you want, any time that you want………assuming that you also have a job that pays the high costs of gas, maintenance, car payments, insurance, registration, etc.Want to avoid these costs and just take public transport? In most of the US that is just not possible. Pay up. Many Europeans have a freedom that most Americans wouldn’t even want………to NOT have a car or any of the expenses that go along with it. Yet, they still get to work just fine and they usually travel and vacation far more than we do. You sure can do a lot when you’re not dumping your life savings into multiple bottomless pits with four wheels. European citizens can travel all over Europe with no visa requirements just like we can in the USA. What do you think that there are still armed checkpoints between France and Germany?? Europeans can move, live and work in any country in the Schengen Area at will.That brings us back to taxation. Did you know that as an American you are taxed on your WORLD WIDE income regardless of residency? Want to move to Europe? Don’t forget to open up all of your effects and papers and share all of the your bank accounts and balances with the IRS every year so that they can violate you and give you a financial rectal exam. Forget an account? The IRS can and will seize up to 100% of the balance of undeclared foreign accounts. Even if you leave the USA and never return, you will always have to file with the IRS every year for the rest of your life. We are the only developed nation in the world to have such an oppressive, draconian tax structure on its citizenry. Want to renounce your citizenship and leave the US? Be sure to pay your $2,350 fee as well as all applicable exit taxes! Renouncing U.S. citizenship: what is the process? But I sure am glad that we are “free.”Democratic Process?Does that make you feel “free?” Well, it shouldn’t. Have you ever heard of gerrymandering? No country is perfect and never will be, but our process is hardly a stellar example of democracy and unity. Just because you vote for your particular tyrant does not mean that you are actually “free.” Europeans vote too, as does most of the developed world.Is it safer here? That’s why you feel free? I have traveled abroad and can tell you that American cities are no shining star of safety and security. Last year I was in Ukraine for 2 weeks and traveled all over the country. I honestly felt safer in Pripyat in the heart of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone than I would in many large US cities. No joke. You’re probably in a greater risk of death walking the streets of Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, San Bernardino, Las Vegas, Memphis at night. And that is a very short list…..not inclusive.Ukraine is actually one of those countries that the US Embassy feels the need to warn American travelers against. I ate well, I drank the water, the people were friendly, my Airbnb accommodations were always clean and secure, and I had a wonderful experience wherever I went. Public transportation was readily available, cheap and reliable. Now, this is not to say that Ukraine doesn’t have other problems, but I never sensed some overbearing sense of oppression that could be solved by American “freedom and democracy.”Better legal/justice system?Ask all of those people that had their lives ruined by the justice system for victimless crimes such as marijuana or prostitution. Also ask all of those people charged, fined or jailed for petty offenses such as “selling liquor on a Sunday,” or after the arbitrarily designated time. What about all of those people who were just old enough to die in the middle east, but not old enough to buy a beer that were charged and given a criminal record and fined? Our laws in the US are quirky, arbitrary and puritanical in many places. Tell me again how religiously biased alcohol laws make you free?Did you know that the average street cop in many European countries does not even possess a firearm? There are also far fewer officer-related shootings. Cop cars? They are painted in highly visible paint so that they are SEEN in case you need assistance!In the good ‘ol USA we seem to prefer black unmarked cars that stalk the populace, hiding unseen from those needing actual police assistance. These traffic cops often spend their days raising revenue aka tax for the jurisdiction, regardless of how arbitrary the law is.And don’t forget, nothing screams American Freedom quite like the armed military-style vehicles that American departments all over the US proudly own. Who exactly do they plan on using that against? Surely not the “free” American Citizenry?There are plenty of other examples to use, but I’m going to wrap it up. The bottom line is that Europeans are just as free……probably more free than Americans in most ways. Asking this question makes you sound like an ignorant, untraveled American that judges the entire world without actually ever seeing the world.If you’ve made it this far you must have liked it. Take a second to give me an upvote!!

My take on it is that it’s yet another example of what makes lawyers drink too much when they read things on the internet, especially when armchair constitutional scholars make loud pronouncements about things that they quite obviously know little to nothing about.It is at best a deep misunderstanding of what the term “public forum” means as applied to constitutional law.It is at worst a concept being deliberately peddled and amplified by actual propagandists in hostile countries conducting information warfare to undermine U.S. society by dividing citizens and stoking distrust of reliable journalism.The argument being promulgated goes something like this:The government can’t discriminate between viewpoints or content in a public forum.These social media sites are essentially the new “town square” where everyone communicates.Because these social media sites are essentially acting as a government agency, they should be held to government standards.Something something inalienable God-given rights.Therefore, social media sites must be forced to let everyone shout, bitch, whine, swear, bully, intimidate, threaten, whatever have you.This is all based on a grossly oversimplified concept of what the public forum doctrine is all about.The government can restrict speech.I will repeat that. The government can restrict speech.Yes, they can.Under the First Amendment, the government can restrict speech.What’s that? Yes, I mean you with the apoplectic complexion waving a pocket copy of the Constitution screaming “but muh First Amendment rightz!! Shall not be abridged, it says here!”Fine. Let me explain.First off, not all speech is protected speech. There are whole categories of speech that are considered low-value or no-value speech. These are not protected, and the government can tell you to fuck straight off for speaking it or even put you in jail because for it. Incitement, obscenity, libel, all of these are not protected. They can ban these based on content, and that’s just fine.Second, even protected speech is not unlimited.The government is under no obligation to provide anyone with a soapbox. You are not entitled to use the government’s property to yell anything you want, protected or otherwise. The government is perfectly free to tell you no, within a certain framework.One of the ways it can restrict speech is with time, place, and manner restrictions.If the government is restricting the place (not the time or the manner, only the place) then the public forum doctrine enters the pictures. The kinds of regulations government can put on the speech depends on what kind of forum it is. There are a number of different kinds of forums.(1) Quintessential or Traditional public forums are basically parks, streets, and sidewalks with an asterisk, if they have been traditionally locations open for public debates. And even sidewalks are a question mark after a 1990 ruling that when the sidewalk is entirely on Post Office property, it’s not a traditional public forum and the government can tell you to get lost.If it’s a traditional public forum, the government has the least leeway in restricting speech. They need to be both content-neutral and viewpoint-neutral.If they are not both content and viewpoint neutral, then it’s not an automatic out. The Court just applies a higher test, called strict scrutiny. The government action passes if it is (1) narrowly tailored (2) to meet a compelling government interest, and (3) there are no less restrictive alternatives.If the regulation is both content and viewpoint neutral, then the Court applies an “intermediate scrutiny” test. The government restriction passes if it is (1) narrowly tailored (2) to an important or substantial government interest, and (3) there are other alternatives available. And the Court has been pretty generous to governments with those other available alternatives.So, as long as the community standards are applicable to everyone, regardless of what they say, they are fine to kick you out of the forum for breaking those rules.They can’t stop you from having a debate on abortion in the local park, but they can say “no pictures of dead babies and no threats of violence.” Break those rules, and it doesn’t matter that a park is a traditional public forum. Your rights are not abridged if they kick you out for that, again, so long as the restriction is narrowly tailored for an important government interest and there are other alternatives available to you.Most public forums are (2) designated public forums. These are open as long as the government says they’re open. They need to be content neutral and viewpoint neutral, but the government can decide that everyone’s had enough free speech for one day and send you all home whenever they want.If not content and viewpoint neutral, strict scrutiny. If content and viewpoint neutral, just the standard intermediate TPM test.So, if you want to take over a city council meeting for your abortion debate and they just decide to adjourn the meeting and send y’all home, that’s fine.Then we get to (3) limited public forums. These are open as long as the government says they’re open, and for specific types of expression. Here, it doesn’t have to be content neutral, only reasonable and viewpoint neutral.So, if you want to take over Leslie Knope’s town hall meeting about the Sullivan Street Pit and turn it into a pro-life abortion protest, they can just kick you out, so long as that’s reasonable and they’re not also letting the pro-choice people talk about that.Then you have (4) non-public forums. These are things like presidential debates. The speakers, the topics, whatever are not just up for grabs. The government is perfectly free to restrict the content or speakers. It just has to be reasonable and viewpoint neutral.So, if there’s a panel discussion at city hall, they can ban talking about abortion in it, or ban you from speaking, and it’s not an infringement on your freedom of speech at all.Lastly, there are (5) non-forums. These are places that are not places for public debate, like the bathroom at city hall. The government can restrict your speech in here to their heart’s delight.All of these, it is important to note, only apply if the applicable forum is government owned, or if privately owned, functions so wholly like a government that it’s basically one (we’re talking like a company town that provides all the services and utilities).If it’s private property, and the owner decides they want you off, your free speech rights are irrelevant. You are trespassing at that point. That’s it. That’s the end of it. They don’t need a reason.But let’s ride right past the fact that these companies are not government owned, and that they certainly don’t provide such an all-encompassing set of utilities and services and own the property you live on to the point where for all intents and purposes they are the local government.Let’s just assume they fit the definition.What kind of public forum are they, then, and why?No, no, no. Don’t just wave your hands at me and say they’re obviously a traditional public forum.Explain why. Show your work.Why is Facebook or YouTube a physical location where people physically gather in a space provided for public benefit and owned by us all? The burden is on you, here. And keep in mind that the Court has been reaaally reluctant to expand this doctrine, to the point where if anything, it’s been narrowing it in physical places.There is no longstanding tradition of letting people use servers owned and maintained by companies at their cost, using their electricity at their cost, to broadcast your message. Bullshit. The technology is less than thirty years old and the concept itself is maybe twenty, and the entire goddamned time people have been trying to figure out how to shut down flame wars.Beyond that, where does Facebook and YouTube exist?No, no. Don’t roll your eyes and say that’s silly. It’s a time, place, manner restriction, and the public forum doctrine only kicks in if the government is restricting the place where the speech is occurring. Place. The physical location or class thereof. How is this a place restriction and not a manner restriction?We use terms like address when it comes to referencing material on the internet, but this is just an analogy to make it easier for us to wrap our heads around. Your posts only exist as ephemeral packets of ones and zeros floating about the ether.At best, glossing over the location issue, I think I could make the case that these are a designated public forum which could be shut down entirely at any time.Which means as long as the community standards are content and viewpoint neutral, there is an important reason for deleting your shitpost or booting you off the platform, and there are ample alternative opportunities for the speech, you are not being unfairly denied your First Amendment rights.The Supreme Court has said that public safety, reducing discrimination, and maintaining peace and order are all important reasons. And there’s plenty of alternatives ranging from deliberately un-moderated sites like 8-Chan to the Wild West of Reddit to the fact that nothing at all is stopping you from buying your own servers and starting up your own site hosted by you where you can blast all the racist, misogynistic, jingoistic screeds you want.But let’s even say that these are traditional public forums owned by the government or a government-esque entity that qualifies.How are you going to regulate it?No, no. I mean precisely that.What? Don’t look at me, you were the one who wanted this to be a public forum. That’s the purpose of the public forum doctrine: to determine how to fairly regulate the forum so that it doesn’t just turn into a shitshow. And as long as those regulations are content-neutral and viewpoint neutral, they can be restricted according to our principles of free speech.That means that people can be punished or have their posts and communications taken down for libel and slander… including those actual disinformation articles that your batshit uncle keeps posting from RT and PJ Media and InfoWars, just as if they were stapling them to the trees and fenceposts in the public park and standing there with a megaphone yelling about it. Yes, they can. And the city is under no obligation to leave them up and can shut it down when it crosses the line into disorderly conduct.Who are you going to put in charge of it? The government? Are you going to create an internet police agency whose job it is to prevent things from getting out of hand online, with the ability to charge people with disorderly conduct to keep it from escalating?Think it through.Is that what you want?You want the government running your social media, with access to your accounts and private messages and browser history?That’s the implications of what you want to have happen here.I have some issues with treating private companies as government entities.But the very same people who are jumping up and down and screaming at me all the day long until their faces turn red about how bad socialism and government takeovers of private enterprises and Venezuela and all that jazz is, now demanding a socialist government takeover of private enterprise, is just bizarrely hypocritical at best.I’m endlessly amused by all the people who love unregulated free markets, right up to the point where that market doesn’t work for them anymore and then they run crying for the nanny state to come in and protect them from the mean people.So, no, the public forum doctrine should not apply, and social media companies are in no way obligated to give you a soapbox and can take it away at any time if you violate the rules.Thanks for the A2A, Janet.I can’t write anything longer than a Twitter post these days without some sort of animal to keep people’s interested. Here.