How BlockDAG’s Fumbles Created the Space for PYRAX — Sharing Lessons From My $RWAID Project

Disclaimer: I am an investor in BlockDAG since March 2024, I am not an investor at this time in PYRAX and I am creator of $RWAID. I am not a crypto analyst, and these are my thoughts and opinions — not investment advice or any other type of advice.

By Josh Case

The emergence of PYRAX has caused a wide range of emotions including excitement, confusion, frustration, anxiety, enthusiasm, anticipation, anger and questions about competition as well as possible investor fragmentation from within the BlockDAG Network community. When a crypto project that claims to have raised north of $440 million struggles with transparency, accountability, clarity, execution and communication, it can create the space for alternative approaches. PYRAX appears to want to occupy that space BlockDAG has opened with their incompetence, underwhelming attention to fiduciary duties and lack of respect for the investors.

BlockDAG’s Challenges Created an Opening

After a two year plus presale BlockDAG difficulties are still unresolved fundamentals.

When these issues persist, confidence erodes. Developers, investors, and community members at some point began looking for clearer frameworks. PYRAX did not emerge in isolation; it emerged because that space was created.

The creators of PYRAX say they want BlockDAG to still be successful which I believe because: why not? Hedging your bets is smart and both can succeed but reality is both can and most likely will cannibalize each other to some extent. It is what it is aka capitalism.

⸻

Regulatory Reality, In Brief From My $RWAID Token Experience

My perspective here is informed by direct experience as the creator of RWA Infra Development LLC “RIDev” token $RWAID, an infrastructure-focused real-world asset project. Link to contract on Etherscan.

$RWAID — ”Tokenizing Infrastructure for the Masses”

RIDev real-world asset tokens are designed to support capital-intensive infrastructure projects, enabling broader participation with lower thresholds for investment than typical infrastructure funds.

That experience reinforced a key reality: U.S.-facing crypto projects encounter meaningful regulatory thresholds related to how tokens are offered, marketed, and distributed. These considerations directly influence timelines, disclosures, and structural decisions, regardless of intent.

My perspective here is informed by direct experience and legal advice. Through my $RWAID real-world asset infrastructure project, I encountered firsthand the regulatory thresholds that apply to U.S.-based or U.S.-facing crypto initiatives.

Depending on how tokens are offered and marketed, projects may fall under:

Regulation A (Reg A)

• Tier 1: Up to $20M in a 12-month period, with state registration

• Tier 2: Up to $75M, requiring audited financials and ongoing disclosures

Regulation Crowdfunding (Reg CF)

• Up to $5M in a 12-month period

• Must be conducted through SEC-registered intermediaries

• Subject to investor participation limits

These frameworks are not abstract. They directly influence timelines, disclosures, and token design. Ignoring them does not remove the obligation — it only delays the inevitable in the US.

⸻

Closing Thought

PYRAX’s emergence makes sense in light of BlockDAG’s unresolved issues. Choosing a Layer 1 reflects lessons learned and an effort to begin with a cleaner framework.

At the same time, experience shows that long-term credibility in crypto — particularly in the United States — depends on regulatory realism alongside innovation.

How BlockDAG’s Fumbles Created the Space for PYRAX — Sharing Lessons From My $RWAID Project was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.