Thanks for the interesting article @AfriDylan . The fact that it doesn't mention a meeting, and that I've heard no other news since the SEC-CFTC meeting was rumoured to have taken place, makes it seem like it was of no consequence. So next time Dave Michaels or Paul Vigna write some click-bait for the Wall Street Journal, we should all take care to read phrases like "A working group of regulators including senior SEC and CFTC officials are scheduled to discuss the matter on May 7, one of the people said." with scepticism.
We should also be cautious of the implied-connection technique. The article talks a lot about an inquiry into what constitutes a security in the cryptocurrency market. But the link to the meeting is deliberately vague when it refers to it as "the matter" instead of the inquiry into cryptocurrencies being a security.
It is still unclear whether the SEC intends to over-step its bounds and use unreasonable, securities classifications as their tool to gain authority over cryptocurrency activity, But I do respect the work they are doing to raise public awareness regarding the risks and warning signs for bad ICOs.