Conduct a threat analysis to find out.
Your inputs are the size of the fines the SEC has historically committed to making entities pay as consequence and the frequency of SEC enforcement in this space.
The formula for a risk assessment requires frequency of event exposure and the magnitude of consequences.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probabilistic_risk_assessment
The SEC went after Satoshi Dice last year. The magnitude of the consequence was a $50,000 fine. The SEC did not go after anyone else and when it went after Satoshi Dice it could not secure the cooperation of the foreign exchange operator.
Based on this you can see that there is no crackdown from the SEC. The risk of SEC prosecution is also fairly low if you're in a position like Satoshi Dice where no one was scammed and everyone is happy with the outcome. In the case that there would be a prosecution it would likely result in a fine which means no one is going to prison and the main expense would be time, legal fees, and an SEC fine.
Now do a cost benefit analysis of this space and calculate how much you have to gain vs how much you have to lose if you get fined by the SEC. How much money did Erik Voorhees make and how much was he fined, how bad was it?
If the SEC cracks down then it will be documented by journalists. These journalists will make it known that it's a victimless crime. Individuals involved will make their intentions known so that the good people of the country can judge the situation for themselves. The SEC does have the power to crack down but then people could and should protest the SEC for unfairly targeting the little guys in the industry for victimless offenses.
This isn't the first post I've made on how to conduct risk assessments. Conducting a risk assessment and a cost benefit analysis should be fundamental knowledges for anyone in this space. If you cannot do this then you're going to not only be scammed, be a sucker tricked into making poor investments, but you'll also be the sort of investor who dumps all your coins on rumors. I encourage everyone in this community or perhaps I3 itself to conduct and share risk assessments where the actions of the SEC are considered along with technical concerns (such as black swan events). I consider an SEC crackdown a black swan event.
In my uneducated opinion, avoiding the the SEC is like avoiding bears. You don't need to be faster than the bear, you just need to be faster than your friends! The I3 team has taken a lot of legal precautions already. If the SEC is to enter the cryptosphere, they're going to go after the easiest targets. They don't have the manpower to go after anything they feel like. And, if history is any indication, they suck at their jobs anyway.
When the SEC targets individuals in this space like Trendon Shavers everyone is fine with it. Trendon Shavers was running an obvious Ponzi scheme and should be prosecuted without mercy. On the other hand we have legitimate innovations in this space in which no one is being scammed, everyone is happy with it, and in that case the SEC would be playing the role of political persecutor. Political persecution may happen but the media is not going to be on the side of the SEC if it does.
The best defense if this black swan event does happen is to document it, put it in the media, and make sure that everyone's true intentions are known. The SEC if it were to recklessly attack this space would create as much negative media attention as when the IRS was caught targeting convervatives. People would ask why the SEC would focus on an industry with less than a 10 billion dollar market cap trying to grow the US economy and create jobs.