Bitcoin Forum

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=868974.msg9764145#msg9764145

How come?


To what I've seen in the past, you've happily accepted bids from Inaba (scammer) and others which had known scam sites. Can find the names if needed.

If it were me making the decision it would be because their identity is well hidden and people could potentially send large amounts of money to them at one time, sometimes with the expectation they will not get anything back from them for a long time (and may not check to make sure funds were received for days). This would potentially make it easy for them to straight up steal money from their customers.

While BFL was certainly a scam, they did not straight up steal in this way.

Bitmixer.io have established themselves (in my eyes) for quite a while now. Just because their identity is obscured, doesn't mean their untrustworthy.

Fair point. Although they may have lost a good amount of money recently (this is speculation) as they had said they could potentially mix several hundred BTC though an exchange per day by depositing and then withdrawing from an exchange, and bitstamp recently disabled withdrawals unless your identity is verified. There were a few anon reports complaining about bitstamp not allowing withdrawals on unverified accounts (I always though this was them)
Another speculation would be that many users of illegal dark net sites will often use sites like bitcoin fog and bit mixer to obscure the source of their bitcoin when they deposit funds (or withdraw funds) from these sites. Although there are many other legit uses he may not want to advertise such a service so soon after receiving a subpoena for evidence in the Ulbright trial.

Yes you're right , but this is the terms :

Theymos is probably concerned that the site may come under scrutiny as abetting crimes by mixing their Bitcoins. There is no dearth of bidders for ad slots so playing it safe makes sense.

That logic doesn't really make sense. Mixing bitcoins isn't illegal but probably most of the unregulated exchanges and casinos that advertise here likely are.

Some casinos even have scam accusations out against them.

He probably knows something about bitmixer that is not public.

There has been a lot more scrutiny against Bitcoin related companies since he accepted ad money from BFL so he is probably more conservative about who he will show an ad for now. 

Does it matter? Its his forum and his liability, he's free to choose what he allows or doesn't in terms of advertising. He doesn't need a concrete reason.

Annnnnd we're back to pre-bitcoin times, centralisation.

Never asked for a concrete reason, just an explanation as to why he refuses them and not other proven scams.

Judging on Theymos original response, he doesn't want to disclose to the public why he doesn't want this particular service advertised. You can always send a message to him regarding the matter, but don't expect to get a response.

I guess it is in his own personal discretion why he chose not to accept that bid.

Perhaps it relates to the recent subpoena?

I would say this is probably correct. The lack of him knowing their identity (and the high chances that they use tor to connect to the forum) probably makes him less willing to allow them to advertise, as if they scam he could potentially be blamed and/or said that he is behind the scam.

This is a centralized forum. It is not realistic to have a decentralized forum. The closest thing to a decentralized forum is reddit and it is very easy to manipulate upvotting/downvoting

The casinos at least try to prevent people residing in places where gambling is illegal from gambling. It is not illegal to advertise a casino in places where gambling is illegal as long as the casino does not allow them to gamble

Quite interesting. I don't particularly trust bitmixer.io either, but I haven't seen any scam accusations against them and they've been around for a while. I really wonder why he refused the bid.

True, but people are also free to ask questions regarding the decision (whether theymos chooses to respond or not). I think denying bids is always going to raise intrigue and curiosity as to why, especially when the company doesn't appear to be doing anything wrong (that we know of) and there's much more questionable ads that get accepted without any problems. I'd personally like to know why they were rejected but theymos is under no obligation to provide any reasoning if he doesn't want to, like you say.

Technically theymos is already allowing them to advertise for free by allowing a signature campaign from them. The difference is where the ads, or in the namesake of the campaign, sigs are shown so to me this is just a bunch of nothing.

is this a discussion of legality or scammer ethics?  

whats legal in your country is not legal in mine.. ie all of these casinos.


ohh.  edit.  on the subject of scammer accusations and the like. not too many drug dealers go to the cops when they get robbed.

That is weird as theymos did accept advertisement for ponzi in the past, and a mixer should at least be more ethical and lawful than a ponzi.

Bump. The least you can do theymos is reply..

The terms states that he can reject bids and he rejected a bid from questionable entity. I think he is being prudent, nothing wrong with that.

I've barked up that tree at least once about a reply on another post, don't recall if it was ever actually addressed but it was about how he has been sitting on a few k BTC in donations that were supposed to be used for site upgrade which don't seem to be getting done. All though some would argue they are, but in the background where we can't see. While that very well may be true for some items.

How long have Avatars been a no go now lol

Grant it when a lot of those donations were made BTC was low in value so to get certain perks one had to donate a few BTC but the issue with that was / is just how long he's had the funds with not much to show for it at present time.

Sorry for the off topic but the point is theymos will only reply if he feels he needs to, or I should say wants to.

Anyway, back to being on topic, what I don't get is if Theymos really has an issue with them. Then why even allow them on the site anyway because like I said before, he is pretty much letting them advertise for free with their sig campaign. The only difference being the placement of the ads compared to the sigs shown for the campaign.

Advertising is advertising whether it's between every three posts or a shit ton of peoples signatures.

I can only imagine that it's something personal. Theymos has accepted ads for outright ponzi schemes before, betcoin.tm is known for faking stats and I'm sure anyone that looks at ads can name more examples of websites that look more shady that bitmixer.

I'm still waiting for the clear answer https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=885320.msg9785947#msg9785947

In agreement with H@C, I've seen advertisements for a variety of sites here over the years including BFL with all those defective non deliverable products a mixing service seems like an ok site to advertise, in terms of risk from outside perceptions looking at the forum would say its negligible myself as changing coins is not illegal or regulated at this point in time and scammers probably are already aware of it if worried about the negative side of it.

except it's not his forum.

Then who's is it? I think theymos is generally considered in charge of running it etc.

Yes it is. He says that it belongs to the community however from a legal standpoint he does own it. Any decision that he makes here can potentially cause him to have some kind of personal liability. His reasoning for not wanting to accept bitmixer's bid likely has something to do with fear of liability (probably criminal) - at least in my opinion

But if that was the case of legality etc then probably half of the companies who advertise here wouldn't be allowed, not to mention banning ponzis and the like. The site doesn't endorse the adverts themselves (or ponzis) and like Bitmixer himself said their adverts are currently on Google, but maybe theymos knows something we do not and maybe he's not willing to discuss that.

bitmixer did mention a government request in their post on the advertising thread.

Theymos does have an incentive to respond as their bid essentially stopped bidding on forum advertising, so they essentially can essentially stop the forum from realizing revenue.

It may also have something to do with the fact their identity is not known as if some government authority says that they are doing something illegal theymos cannot point to someone elses's identity and say they were the ones behind such illegal acts.

(more speculation) maybe theymos has reason to believe that bitmixer is backed by some government agency

That was to do with the recent subpoena that theymos recieved regarding information on DPR for the Silk Road case and wasn't anything to do with this as far as I know (though maybe he recieved something else or has been spooked by it (but again, that doesn't answer why just Bitmixer have been denied).

If theymos did receive some kind of government request to not allow bitmixer to advertise/promote themselves then it would probably have been separate from the DPR/SR1 subpena.

I am very curious to know why theymos has not responded as of yet, there doesn't seem to be any reason for him to at least respond and/or give some kind of rationale behind his actions - he does seem to think that the forum belongs to the community and the community clearly does want some kind of explination

Running something and owning it are not the same thing, weather Theymos even ``legally`` owns bitcointalk is largely debatable. The way Satoshi intended it to be was a sort of charity or non profit for the Bitcoin community that would further it, not as a piggy bank for one man. I`m not accusing Theymos of thinking of bitcointalk as his personal bank but I`m just clearing up some misconceptions some of you have.

I think the misconception you have is that this forum 'belongs' ie is owned by satoshi or the community. It's legal ownership may be a grey area but we all know who is currently managing this place and is in charge of the forum whether the way it is currently being run is satoshi's indented design or not.

Which is exactly what it is right now which is the truly sad part.

Still didn't receive any explanation from theymos :(

This forum belongs to the community as much as your house does. We live in a capitalistic world, people have to own things.

that's a terrible analogy.

well, i dont know if it counts, but im using bitmixer services ... just for the fun of it ... and i NEVER had any issues
will use again when i fell like it

So, the public doesn't have any right to his house, correct? Well there you go, the public has exactly the same right (none) to 'own' this forum.

<scrolls down looking for theymos's reply and is amazed that he agrees with dogie's replies>

Where does he "agree with dogie's replies"?

I think he was talking in third person and saying he agrees with dogie's replies, not theymos (if that's what confused you).

While yes, dogie's responses are very much factually accurate. However with that being said, if theymos wants people to feel "welcome" in his "house" which he clearly does as he profits from people being and posting here, he will need to give some kind of explanation when he treats one person (or in his case user) differently.

IMO, his lack of response will cause some what level of uneasiness (not to a very large extent as this appears to be a somewhat isolated incident)

I too was confused, but it does make sense if you imaging the <> as **

http://myyellowlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/xanax-for-dogs1.jpg

Sorry to bring this thread back to life, but maybe theymos had received either subpoena or other legal process related to bitmixer in the past (or more likely shortly prior to them bidding on the forum auctions).

If bitmixer was recently (as of when the OP was created) then it would make sense for them to want to advertise more in order to attract more illicit business.