I'm going to strongly disagree with this.
People are allowed to have outside interests. Being incidentally interested in blockchain tech is not a disqualifying attribute. Having worked in large technology companies is not a disqualifying attribute. Neither of these things should even be counted negatively.
It's not about outside interests. NFTs and crypto are widely viewed as inherently scammy (and, of course, environmentally destructive). And working for a tech start-up trying to disrupt housing - when the activities of tech companies like Zillow are already seen as making housing even more unaffordable for people - is really bad optics.
Neither of these mean that he's a bad candidate. He might have an amazing background in non-profit governance that he will bring to the Board. He might be someone really dedicated to our mission. The problem is that these details haven't been shared. The diff posting [1] includes some kind platitudes, but that's it.
It may just be a messaging failure. Coming so soon after the kerfuffle with Jimmy's proposed NFT sale, and just after Molly White opened an RFC on crypto, ans coming in the middle of a housing crisis, I find it worrying that the only message seems to be "trust us".
Ian