[DigitalToday reporter Yoonseo Lee] David Schwartz, a former chief technology officer at Ripple, said he takes a negative view of treating memecoins as investments.

On May 18 (local time), blockchain media outlet BeInCrypto reported that Schwartz said, during a community dispute over the XRP Ledger-based memecoin FUZZY, that he finds the idea that people think of a memecoin as an investment to be distasteful.

The dispute began after Schwartz left XRP Ledger settings open to receive FUZZY tokens. Some XRP holders took it as a de facto sign of support, but Schwartz denied that interpretation. He explained that the setting was merely a routine procedure on the network, not a show of confidence in a specific project. He added that he is not directly related to FUZZY and does not have more information than other investors.

On the XRP Ledger, such settings are used as a required procedure to hold or receive specific tokens. The community sometimes interprets a settings change by a well-known figure as interest in or support for a token, but Schwartz made clear that it should not be overinterpreted.

FUZZY is a token named after a wallet that Ripple activated when the XRP Ledger launched in 2013. The name refers to an early wallet, "Fuzzy Bear", which is known for a transaction early in the XRP Ledger in which 1 XRP was exchanged for 1 BTC. Still, Schwartz drew a line on public support regardless of the token's symbolism.

Schwartz also explained why he does not publicly support a specific memecoin. He said, "I have no choice but to be careful because I could end up in an awkward situation unintentionally," while adding, "At the same time, there is no reason to view the FUZZY token itself negatively." Rather than criticising a specific token, he appeared to be wary of the impact public remarks could have on the market.

He also expressed scepticism about the intrinsic value of memecoins. Some users pointed out that memecoins have no intrinsic value and are traded only on expectations of finding a next buyer at a higher price, and Schwartz agreed. He said trying to build a serious portfolio with such tokens is ridiculous. He added that memecoins themselves have value within internet culture.

Schwartz's remarks show the dual nature of memecoins. Memecoins can function as a means of community cohesion and an expression of internet culture, but if investment logic is built solely on expectations of price gains, they can take on a strong speculative character. In an environment where even small actions by industry figures are interpreted as buy signals, there is room for investor misunderstanding to grow.

Reactions in the XRP community were mixed. Some supporters argued that, separate from personal assessments, memecoin liquidity tied to XRP helps the broader ecosystem. Others backed Schwartz's caution and countered that the community should stop pressuring developers or industry figures for public endorsements.

The comments also again showed Schwartz's existing view of distinguishing community tokens from investment assets. Schwartz has maintained a line that tokens for fun and assets that require allocating a large share of funds should be viewed differently. As a result, even if the memecoin boom on the XRP Ledger continues, disputes over public remarks by core developers and industry figures may continue for some time.

I do find the idea that people think of a memecoin as an investment to be distasteful.