I'm about as "anti crypto" as they come, and I find the whole need/purpose for a Bitcoin spot ETF to be completely baffling (and I suspect most actual crypto <i>enthusiasts</i> would agree), but this seems like the right decision to me.<p>I specifically agreed with this comment: "The SEC has been getting blasted for its regulation-by-enforcement approach to crypto." I understand the SEC's hostility to crypto, but what I don't understand is why they can't just provide clearer rules, up front, about what is OK and what is not, instead seeming to explicitly <i>not</i> provide clear guidance and then saying to companies after the fact "no no, that's too far" (in some cases - other cases were clearly fraudulent BS from the get go).<p>I'm not a lawyer, and haven't been following the ins and outs of all of the crypto-SEC battles super closely, but I'd be curious if someone with more knowledge in the domain could comment on why the SEC hasn't been more proactive in defining rules.