### Notes about blog post commit [#36fcb82e7db723a97c18585ac106ad68a89904cb](https://github.com/okapi-tech/product/commit/36fcb82e7db723a97c18585ac106ad68a89904cb) > In this short post we try to explain how blockchains can be used for more than simply value transfer. - This seems like you want to talk to people who are unaware of what blockchains are. Make the reader feel like he/she is intelligent, not dumb. - Maybe the first paragraph can be more directly related with want you are working on, not so vague. > A great deal has been said about the roles of intermediaries in financial transactions. - I get that you are trying to not lose time talking about basics (and making the reader feel smart), but since they have no idea who is writing, an short intro to what you mean here might be good. > A great deal has been said about the roles of intermediaries in financial transactions. The story of the third party who tracks the credit and debits of user's accounts is a key part of the history of money and often it is this narrative that gets the most attention when thinking of how blockchain technology will be used with traditional financial applications. > > Of course this is true, the blockchain can be a ledger that enables Alice and Bob to transfer value between one another without needing Charlie to maintain the ledger. - First paragraph the _banking_ problem is introduced, second paragraph the blockchain is introduced. These two topics are disconnected, and middle paragraph relating one with the other could be good. > Another role of third parties, in financial transactions, is to perform the pricing and valuation. - Not clear what other roles were mentioned. - Pricing and valuation in what context? Trading? Collateral? Credit? Insurance? > In the ISDA framework the counterparties designate a valuation agent who calculates the mark-to-market of the counterparties portfolio and a calculation agent who has the final say on the pricing of a trade. - This is the start of the _meat_ in the post. There was very little setup for the main course of the post. No mention of regulation, of the risk of intermediaries etc... > The valuation and calculation agents have high degree discretion over the valuations they come up with. Usually this arrangement ends up favouring one of the two parties in the agreement. - This is great. Simple, clear, and direct. It leaves plenty of space to contribute with FUD about the subject. > So what can we do if we don't agree with the value? - This seems like the perfect tone for an informal tone for a post like this. Although the setup before for the reader to have this question already lingering could be better. I would aim not to ask the question before, but to try and talk about the subject in a way that when the reader gets to the question relates to it, in the sense _that was exactly what I was wondering?_ > One solution is to assign a co-calculation agent or pursue a legal dispute. Either way it is a slow and expensive way of arriving at an answer - and you still might not like that answer. - Again really clear and simple description. Plenty of space for more FUD > This is where blockchain can help. Specifically the Ethereum protocol with its deterministic execution environment, the EVM, allows execution of a calculation without the need for a third party to verify the result. This is what is known as trustless computation. - This sounds a bit techy (which isn't a bad thing). Also you are selling more Ethereum than the idea of replacing the third party with a mechanism (which to me sounds more broad, eventually in the post you can touch on specific platforms) > The EVM and trustless execution can help to remove the disputes and asymmetries that arise as part of the pricing and valuation of counterparties trades. - How? What does this mean? > Using a deterministic execution environment - I think that no one, except people deep into the blockchain tech, understand what the sentence _deterministic execution environment_ means. It is really up to who you want to reach > Not only does this remove the ambiguity of the valuations, but it enables users to use the same pricing methodologies. - This is a good sentence to have made clear. A real FUD disabler > Reduction in disputes due to valuation disagreements has the potential to save market participants a significant amount in operation and legals costs. - Maybe adding examples sometimes is good. Something like _just last year X amount was wasted in legal services_ > Additionally the use of deterministic environments to create shared and transparent pricing methodologies - This seems to repeat something wrote previously > We've already a great deal of work in this area in the DeFi space but the real prize is adoption by traditional financial market participants. - This sentence seems unusual, although the selling is great. - I don't know if this last selling point is needed having into account that you describe your selling point in the conclusion. --- It seems like a good start, although there is something missing in terms of flow. - It should feel a bit like a movie - Introduce the characters - Create a story around the problem - Tackle the problem in an entertaining way - in this case the entertaiment is getting to know how the nitty gritty of the problem and solution work - Wrap up going deep into the solution - Close with an open door for a chat with Okapi and its people