Bitcoin Forum

I just noticed that some users in the default trust list gave negative trust to bitstamp owner. I feel this to be over exaggerated, given the long history and their behaviour after the hack: they admitted it, and promised refunds. What more they should do?

Let's see if this turned out to be a second mtgox, but giving negative trust now is at best premature, and surely immature, given the site's history and what seemed to be happened

I do think it's unfair to be doing that kind of thing before them being proven guilty, I have hopes for Bitstamp so I'm not going to run around passing judgement just yet, they have been nowhere near acting as dodgy as MT.GOX did.

What's the big deal then? When they open site again, people can remove their feedbacks.

Vod wrote, textually, " bitstamp is a scam site" . U feel that this could not damage unfairly bitstamp's reputation, even after remotion?

I repeat: what they could had done better? As far as we know now, they were hacked for 18000 btc, they immediatly stop and stated it, and promised reimbursement.

I've read before about vod abusing hiso position in the default trust, this seems to me a blatant example of it.

I don't feel that way. If you think Vod's (or anyone else's) trust rating can damage Bitstamp, it shows that their reputation is not good enough for you already.

Can we get a link to the trust profile please?

I " " know" "  vod (simply by reading a lot this forum) and I think he is honest, but sometimes acts on rage and over-report like if he was bitcoin-police. I think that a red default  trust could be a big damage for a company like bitstamp, it dosen't matter how I personally trust the site or vod's rating.

I just feel that someone in the default trust should act more responsably: bitstamp was (and, as long as I know, is) the most reputable exchanger, damaging it could damage the whole btc economy.

Even more than that, seemed to me that they acted the best as they can.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=38966


EDIT: i feel that redsn0w's decision  of changing his feedback in a more appropriate neutral one would fit best the case atm. He was very kind and contacted me by PM    :)

Bitstamp sudenyly stop his service. No mater how good record or reputation of their history, it doesn't  mean they will always run their business well . It just gives warning to the new comers.

Vod's feedback is almost two months old, and if you care to go to the "Reference" link you'll learn that it's due to an unrelated issue.

OMG, what is wrong with this VOD ??? Really annoying guy in my opinion.

Thank you, I missed that  :-[ , given the recent events I was sure it was related to the theft.

But, after reading, i still feel that the rating is over-exaggerated, don't you?  How many people are reading it now, and pissing their pants?

Not a bitstamp customer so I don't know first hand but if I was asked for my ID after being prevented from withdrawing BTC I'd be pretty pissed off.

It is pretty well explained in the reference post, this guy had a year to move his money or give ID! Bitstamp have to complain with laws, that's why we need a p2p exchanger... but I highly doubt that bitstamp had any choiche given the situation, burocrates can close their activity in a blink if they don't respect regulations.

They have lost ~19'000 bitcoin , due to their mistake.

Ha, pretty funny considering redsnow was complaining about this feedback he received recently. Too bad Bitstamp don't have a BadBear to save them from their 'mistake'.  

Yes , pretty funny.  However a neutral trust is not a problem , at least I don't have lost the access to the forum account for ever.  19k bitcoin is not equal to a forum account.


Again  : redsn0w  not redsnow  , thanks.