Bitcoin Forum

Recently, there has been discussion on what will happen to the leftover fund?

1. We all know whirlwind.money has left no path for a comeback. They aren't active for a long time now. But what they have left; $40k DAI in escrow with minerjones. MJ has already distributed more than half of the funds and is still holding ~$17k. What's going to happen to this? Who will be the owner of this fund if whirlwind never  comes back?

2. ChipMixer has been seized and DarkStar_ said all the outstanding payment will be sent. Has he sent the outstanding payment? I can't see any update on the thread. Nevertheless, there was ~1.30 Bitcoin on the ChipMixer signature campaign escrow address which has been later sent to another address. Who has received the fund?

What will happen to the leftover fund? Why do we really bother what will happen with the fund?

In case of whirlwind, imagine that whirlwind has come back and processed all the withdrawals & asked minerjones to send their fund from escrow back. What if some of the members don't send the fund back? Will some of you compensate minerjones? I guess no. Then why we really should think the fate of the leftover fund? Let escrow decide what will happen.

In case of ChipMixer, DarkStar_ announced of sending the outstanding & he should do that since he was in control of the fund in escrow. After that he has the right to do anything with the leftover fund. We don't have right to decide, do we?

The purpose of this thread isn't to put some sauce on the issue. The issue has been in discussion randomly in ChipMixer ANN thread, in a thread in Meta. That's why I thought of creating a new thread so that users can discuss here instead of being off topic in other discussion.

In my view, as long as those escrow funds serve their primary purpose, which is settling the debt, I do not think we should sweat the details of what happens with the remainder. That is really in the hands of the escrow team to figure out. they probably have their own policies or guidelines to deal with these situations.

I think escrows and managers should put up a disclaimer saying if money goes unclaimed for a certain period of time, then the companies forfeit the funds. As long as the person who has the funds did their job anyways. We cannot really expect them to just hold the funds for years and hope someone shows up. Just my opinion

Pfft.  I just remember "Chipmixer website seized"-->end of campaign-->I'm outta here.   I can't remember what was last paid as far as campaign weeks go, but personally I don't want any payout from DarkStar_ if it turns out I was owed one.  If other Chipmixer participants want the scraps, take 'em.

Somehow I never really expected there to be anything forthcoming as far as CM is concerned, and DarkStar_ must be in a tight spot.  He's holding onto money that might be watched by the FBI and who knows who else, and unless I'm wrong he's in a "damned if I do, damned if I don't" position.

Whirlwind I've got sweet fuck all to say about, as I never followed their doings.  Interesting thread, OP.

I don't know about how the escrow deal was arranged but if there's a forfeit involved it's better. There isn't a standard way to carry out escrow business so it's something ppl arrange when fixing terms. Do we know what terms they'd agreed to when the DAI was sent?

Cases are very different, so it should be viewed separately.


In case of Whirlwind, funds were held in an Escrow by minerjones. Initially, funds were dedicated for Whirlwind's review campaign. Everything went as expected and funds were re-allocated by whirlwind to get an escrow fund to ensure trust as far as I know. There's been a statement from Whirlwind


So, in my opinion these funds are still valid for possible refunds of damaged customers but I would also say if a Bitcointalk community vote was held, funds could be spent otherwise.
It's mainly public funds now. But not exclusively.



In case of ChipMixer, funds were dedicated for weekly rewards of ChipMixer's Signature campaign. The funds served a defined purpose. In addition to that, last round of weekly rewards have been paid but interestingly, the transaction came from a different wallet than usually (usually it comes from 1Chip... wallet). Should be investigated where it came from, maybe there's more.
And as far as I know, only DarkStar_ had access to the wallet, while the wallet was topped up every 5 or 6 weeks by ChipMixer.
A reply from DarkStar_ to clarify where he / she sent the funds and why would be interesting.

After all it's also public funds and the purpose of these funds should happen by a democratic decision of Bitcointalk's community. It's what happens to public funds.
We would only need to decide who's eligible to vote in case of a decision: just campaign participants, in addition to campaign participants certain ranks (Hero / Legendary) or everyone above Member rank / xx Merit earned?  

After all, it's essential to make a fair decision here.
But I'm not the one to decide that, whole Bitcointalk community is.

---

So far, not really much has been discussed about it, so it'll get interesting to investigate this.

I don't think anyone here knows the answer. I'm just glad I'm not the one who has to make a decision on this: no matter what you do someone is going to be unhappy about it.

The blockchain is public, it's easy to check.

There are no "public funds", and there is no democracy involved.

Count me out, I don't want to vote on Other People's Money (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102609/).

There are some possible ways:

1. Do nothing and high likely will lost.
2. It's become an extra bonus for the escrow.
3. Share it to every users who're involved.
4. Donation e.g. this forum, the one who needs etc.

I'm expecting the funds will end either number 1 or 4, number 2 looks to be fine as long as there's a contract or rule from the user who act as an escrow, and the number 3 looks quite unethical.

Do we need to make everyone happy? an user who was get red tagged by you is obviously not happy.

I said that in another topic already: the fact that someone disappeared or scammed doesn't make his money our. This is not our money and we have no moral rights to make a decision of how to manage that money.

When we talked about the compensation for damage which was made by escrow guy, this is what this money was left for, so it's the main purpose for it. If there will be revealed that there are other victims, they can claim damages as well, if they will provide sufficient data to escrow guy. But that's all.

So I agree with LoyceV, I'm not going to take part in any voting on how to deal with other people's money. And please don't place me anyhow on a list of those who can anyhow get any penny benefit from this money.

The fund was moved around a last active day of DarkStar_ in Bitcointalk. If his account was not compromised, that wallet was not compromised, that device was not compromised, the sender is DarkStar_ but we can not know it.

If no victims left, the leftover fund can be return to an address used to send bitcoin to that escrow address. Then manager completes his job.

With Whirlwind campaign, it is different because that Escrow is for potential victim of their campaigns, advertisement in forum.

Once again it's important to avoid mining up both cases.

While for Whirlwind, the incident happened a few weeks ago and there are likely more customers to be refunded. That's why I'm in favor to keep the escrow fund where it is currently. It's serving a purpose.

It's different for ChipMixer. ChipMixer isn't an escrow fund, it's for ChipMixer's Signature campaign. Considering these funds have been sent now, without any explanation and broader community consent is exactly what I believe is how these funds shouldn't be handled. We don't know why and where the 1.3 BTC were sent to.

The issue: there are not any rules yet how such funds should be treated for the ChipMixer case. The community needs to define these rules or we will have this coming up again. Maybe not every year but maybe every 2 years.
At least for the Whirlwind Escrow fund, the funds are serving a purpose currently.

It still was escrow fund by definition.
The deal was between Campaign manager and the project owner, none of the campaigners get anything (or at least demand anything). Have you been paid for the week/weeks you wore the signature. The answer is yes. Case close for campaigners.

If managing a marketing business was so easy, not required risking loss, only profit then I would not have to pay many times several thousands if not five figures already out of my own pocket in several campaigns. I don't think that time many members were too keen to accept a no payment (sometimes a few but it's not even 1% of the total).

What I am saying is: loss, left, profit, whatever it is - it's the deal between two party.
One > The campaign manager
Two > The project owner.

You, me and rest of us should have no concern. We are third party.

Making a written contract like not claiming the money after x days/weeks/years will result xyz can be a good idea though. I have done it with few of my clients but it was more formal like -
If the project end up with bad reputation and communication disconnected for x months then you (project owner) do not owe anything from the escrow fund. It will be use to cover loss of the campaigners and management business.

The answer from them are always yes.

You nailed it.

From what was stated publicly, it wasn't escrow for any refund, just Signature campaign weekly rewards. Completely different from Whirlwind.
And when it's an escrow fund, it's even more controversial that the funds are getting sent now. Funds getting sent means ChipMixer came back? Address got hacked? Something else we dont know yet?
For an Escrow fund it is essential to be handled properly, especially after things are unclear.

A good example how an escrow fund can be managed professionally in a messy situation is whirlwind's Escrow fund managed by minerjones (and Hhampuz).

If we don't fix any uncertainties, much more controversies will happen again.
And I'm saying that as a supporter of escrow funds. Maybe every project doing a Signature campaign can provide an escrow fund and in case of an exit scam, losses could be covered. Most likely, such a procedure would reduce risks of exit scams, too.


+1
That's a good suggestion how such a deal could look like. Service and Escrow provider agree to a set of publicly available rules, where (best case) every possible scenario is covered.
It's a great idea to incentivize honest services.

As long as Service provider and escrow provider is okay with agreeing mutually in private or in any form - I think it's just fine. It does not need to be public at all.

Difference was the manager Hhampuz was not trusted by $40k DAI so they went with an independent third party escrow which was minerjones in this case.

DS was holding his own campaign funds.
I hold my own campaign funds, when failed covered the loss from my own pocket.
Hhampuz holds his own campaign funds, when failed he also covered funds from his own pocket if I am not mistaken.

All are a form of escrow, you can define it by any other proper wording if you want but, all of it are escrow.

Again whatever deal was in between the escrow provider (third party or campaign manger himself) and the project management - no one supposed to have any concern as long as they got paid for participating in a campaign or the goal of the escrow was fulfilled.

Exactly because I'm sure if after holding for several years and someone suddenly shows up, then the holder is expected to make a refund and in cases where they can't,  they might be dragged out, hence I support the motion that a disclaimer be made that any unused funds over a period of time be forfeited as this keeps but the manager and it's escrow at a safer side.

I'm reading the replies here and I get the feeling that I'm missing something fundamental--and it's really only Chipmixer that I'm referring to.

Those two ideas above: Wouldn't anything Chipmixer gave DarkStar_ that hasn't been paid out consider kind of tainted by any of those agencies I mentioned in my previous post?  In other words, if DarkStar_ donated leftover campaign funds (and that's what I think I'm confused about) to bitcointalk, would that not potentially pose a legal problem down the line?

Ah, so we were paid in the end for those last few days of the campaign, good to know.

Up until now I assumed we weren't (and I even said that in another thread :p) because I don't really check my sig campaign wallet on the regular basis and few days ago when I checked the usual address from where sig campaign was paid, there were no transactions (except that latest one when funds were moved).

I'm not convinced that's skill, more a coincidence. I've also seen a bad example of how escrow funds can be managed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5368163.0).

I'm a sucker for strict rules, but it's difficult to take all possible scenarios into account before they happen. This is one of the reasons I don't actively offer escrow services (although I've done it a few times when asked). Yahoo62278's suggestion is a good disclaimer to add if it happens again.

Eddie's post comes to mind again:
Remember the forum's mission:
If someone wants to risk not getting paid for having a certain signature for a week, who are we to stop them?

Agreed. But it will lead to topics like this one, where people question things they're not a part of. The next step would be handing out negative feedback demanding answers, and think that would have happened already if the 2 accounts involved would have had a lesser reputation.

I'm pretty sure it was Hhampuz' own call to ask another escrow. He ran the campaign and avoided a conflict of interest this way.

I can't believe I have to say this, but: You know the only way to see if you've been paid Bitcoin is by checking your own address, right? Not someone else's address?

At least, from what I've noted in my document, yes.
Of course, maybe it's different for other participants? I've not checked everything back then.
Half a year has already passend and maybe I don't remember any additional circumstances.

And yes, from what I've noticed, last round of rewards came from a different wallet than usually (not 1Chip address). 

Lol of course I know, but as I said I haven't checked my address for some time and never really bothered to check whether I got paid for those few days or not (tbh I totally forgot about it and I got bunch of other sig payments there). Only the other day when someone mentioned that leftover funds moved, I saw that there were no transactions after March 15th that looked like signature payments, therefore I assumed that we weren't paid in the end.

Definitely, covering all possible scenarios is a very difficult task but at least covering 95% is already a benefit. Even if it takes some time to figure out how to do it because we'll always have a learning curve.


What eddie13 said there, sounds good but doesn't work in reality for most cases. And nobody gets "bullied".  ::)
Yes, services should be able to decide which way to go - but some ways will end in a big mess.
We have seen that for signature campaigns managed in-house, like YoBit or right now 1xbit and the result is not desirable.
Bitcointalk recommends to select a trusted campaign manager to avoid spamming the forum due to Shitposts or similar issues. No one complains that selecting a campaign manager is something bad or services are getting "bullied" to select a proven campaign manager.
Selecting a know campaign manager is beneficial for the service, the forum and all participants.

Same applies to arrange an escrow fund.

Of course, providing some BTC into a trusted escrow for signature campaigns should be voluntarily - and will very likely attract more participants compared to a competitor, where no such escrow fund is offered.

I totally forgot that something similar happened with CM, only difference is that WW website is still working (sort of).
We can have many theories and speculations what happened with both of them, but we know for a fact they are both gone from forum.
Coins in CM were meant for future campaign payments, so it would probably be fair to see them equally distributed to ex-participants (if they want it).
Situation is a bit different with WW because funds are used as safety backup, but I don't see any reason to keep this funds frozen forever.

Why should managers and escrows be any different?
They also got paid for their work as they agreed, so I don't understand why would they deserve bonus money...
I never saw any manager posting in public how much they earn, but they sure posted how much money they lost when scam project hired them and than gone missing  ;)
I think it's better to have partial terms clearly posted in public to avoid future calamities, because I am sure we are going to see more meltdowns and busted projects in future, one way or another.
For example, in case something happens with XXX service, this ___ will happen with leftover funds, that way all parties will have more clarity.
Small change, but it makes a huge difference.

I would not like that my post to look like some pressure placed on purpose on DarkStar_'s shoulders, but I believe that, at least, he should come up with a resolution for the funds he is keeping.

The situation is even more intriguing, as the funds remaining after CM was seized were moved on August 18th (https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/addresses/btc/1ChipWGhJtEWCeSq3cra4HmKhvYqe8Tvty) to another address, which holds 50 BTC. The entire amount moved was 1.30807482 BTC. CM's address used for payments was 1ChipWGhJtEWCeSq3cra4HmKhvYqe8Tvty.

At same time, this address also hold some fork coins, such as 1.99 bcash for instance (I did not check for other fork coins, but I believe they are also available). In any case, the amount is low.

At least as long as the 1.3 BTC were kept inside the same address I thought that DarkStar_ has some plans with them and, perhaps, he would take a decision at a later time and come up with a few words about his decision. But seeing the funds were moved and there is still just silence from his side -- this brings a lot of questions...

I will repeat myself -- I don't want this to sound as an extra pressure for DS_. Perhaps he also does not know what to do with the money. And, at same time, I believe that is a very trustworthy forum user. But a few words from him would be nice.

---

Regarding the other funds, kept by MJ / HHampuz, I believe they are still kept in case other victims will show up. But again, it would be helpful if they would also think about a plan for what to do with those funds in case no other victims will show up for a certain amount of time from now on.

It makes sense, just imagine if the owner of the fund has not shown up for years, should the owner of the escrow have to keep silent about managing the money, even though it is very likely that in the future someone will appear trying to take the money, I think the manager of the escrow should make a rule that the fund those that are not taken for 1 year will be deducted, then accumulated if the owner of the funds has not taken them for many years.

dkbit98 is right, should have been distributed during last payment directly among CM campaign members right away.
It is not really difficult what to do. It is Bitcoin left from CM campaign.
Send it to campaign members, manager keeps managing fee, done.
Issue solved.
Sometimes, it is not very complicated.

I don't know about WW money, have not read enough to make a statement here.
Just really concerning how after WW promised HHampuz to come back and solve problems but it did not happen.

Better still, escrow is a service that has more to do with safeguarding a fund for a fee and don't necessarily have much to do with the business of the company. À term like this would be to the detriment of the company and personally, that ain't such a fair practice.
Since one can't predict what strikes might be fall a company in tbe future, I'll rather edit your suggestion in quote to something that takes the nature of a periodic deduction;

* In the event that a campaign or project is paused with left over funds, there would be periodic debit on available funds in _% within _% of holding until the promotion is resumed.

After all, your deal is to hold and not mind there business.

Either ways, participants in there promotions don't get to decide. You worked with them gor a week, your paid for the week, that's your take!

That fund was a collateral for if whirlwind suddenly disappeared (they did), and if they ever come back, this is all they are entitled to.


See:


The person holding the funds in escrow has discretion to make a decision regarding the funds as he sees fit in the event that the service and contact disappears. Most likely case I think is that the outstanding balance goes to a charity maybe. It helps to avoid legal issues around the reception of funds for these services that have been unspent or improperly spent.

This is only possible if both parties have no deal and the escrow has no terms about leftover funds, It's for the escrow party to address or not this issue because this is a deal of two parties involved, but the escrow party could send a message to the other party or make a public announcement here specifying a claiming period or they will consider this a lost fund and a lost fund is considered finder's keeper under specific time to claim the funds and can decide on what to do with the funds.

In this thread it has not been made clear what The fate of the leftover fund will be. The Whirlwind forum representative has was last online in July 2023. Has there been any comment or statement made in any thread in the forum that can indicate what is happening (or will happen) to the remaining escrow funds?

Edited: Deleted for wrong understanding.

If you are genuinely interested and not spamming for signature payment then go and find yourself. No one is working for you to bring you an executive summary.

What possible legal issue you think it could have? I don't think we even should suggest anything. It's completely depend on the person who provided the service. Even if he decides to use the fund for his own, I see no issue.

I am coming back on this thread, as it seems that DarkStar_ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=507936) became to be sort of active again. Maybe not in term of posts, but I see that he also merited some users recently, inside his loans thread.

In case he did not see this topic while he was inactive, maybe he'll see it now...

Perhaps, for more visibility, it would be better if OP would also change topic title from "The fate of the leftover fund" to "The fate of the leftover fund from ChipMixer / WhirlWind" (although the part about Whirlwind has been solved).

What I don't understand is why he needs to say anything about leftover money. I mean, since that was signature campaign money and all signature campaign participants got paid for their work, why should we care what he does with the money, and why should he give us any explanation after all?

The way I see it, its between him and the person who hired him and gave him the money to run signature campaign.

It's a question asked by OP and it's a question which stays on the tip of the tongue of many other users, be them ex-CM participants or not.

Interesting how ChipMixer leftover fund is pretty legitimate and not sanctioned at all and SinBad leftover fund is not okay at all...

You should contact the agency taking down chipmonkey mixer and consult about the funds, if they say it's Ok to spend it by distributing it among the participants, you can come here and say it's good to go, but if they say it's illegal money, then the CM should return it to the government.

But isn't obvious? They were involved in illegal activities, that money is dirty already whether anyone tells you, it should be obvious for anyone.

Nobody said that CM leftover funds are legitimate or not. But the main difference between these 2 cases is the fact that one manager (Royse) came immediately with a statement for the funds from Sinbad campaign, while the other one (DarkStar_) did not bother to do same thing even 8 months after CM was shut down. As a plus, he also moved the leftover funds from CM campaign (1.3 BTC (https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/addresses/btc/1ChipWGhJtEWCeSq3cra4HmKhvYqe8Tvty)) to another address, which contains 50+ BTC. I believe that if he would come up with an explanation as well all things would become more clear about what he had (has) in his mind.

Well what he has on his mind is to slide that money into his own pocket, unless you can ask him for explanation here, but who cares, right? After all it WASN'T declared illegal by AUTHORITIES, so he decided to be the authority, this is normal and accepted behaviour around these woods.
~karenprime2

Personally, I believe that the receiving address bc1q29xpuw8mx9933xed7t6r03yge42zf2rqmevntm belongs to chipmixer, that he had a manager-to-client agreement outside the forum, and that whatever is left in escrow is between the manager and his client. We don't have right over it.

Whatever the manager does with the escrow fund once a campaign is over should not be our concern. Same with Royse777

Well, you better keep your personal opinions separate from your official opinions "sherrif" or whatever that means anyways, besides just a heads up, you just slapped your boss with a red tag, so much of a "sherrif". Lol
And of course it's not our business, right? It's not like they have been keeping 1.3 BTC on their own address for more than 8 months.

Around here, people only have the balls to tag someone for $50-$100  any amount above that makes their head feel dizzy.

---

So yeah, you all should wait for orders from above, because you can't obviously decide on your own, after all, you could all be some teenagers behind a desk, for all we know, right?

You really need to work on yourself and learn how to have peaceful discussions without being an asshole who is always trying to put others down. What Royse777 and DS have in their possession is none of your concern if you were appropriately compensated for the period of your work.

I'm not a compromised Sherrif so shove your  "official opinion" in your a$$..

Learn how to not talk about Other people's money

Mr digaran.
A couple of members suggested you no longer be involved in reputation board threads for your goodwill. I also agree with them because I believe you do not have the proper way to talk to people. You should go somewhere else where shit posters write for the campaign requirements. I understand that you won't enjoy it there.

But, as others also said, you are not helping yourself. People do not need more reasons to tag you. You may get ten more tags for the same reason you got the other tags. I would also suggest you avoid this board.

Why so serious and why can't you stand criticism? I was never part of a chipmonkey campaign, Darkstar I consider him my friend, but seeing such behaviour from him, I'm surprised and shocked, and I'm telling this to point out the obvious, whether LE says that 1.3 BTC is illegal or not, that money is no longer clean, it's a dirt and he should get rid of it.

Actually I had you on ignore, I don't know why I unignored you, maybe to see if you have something useful to say.
But now I'm scared, wet my pants after your aggressive behaviour towards a civilian citizen. Lol  AND why am I being an A hole? Because you have passed your poor judgement on me about my complaint on JG, you are his DT voter, so excuse my butthurt.

---

@bsv, LB is bad, catch!😂

If you include everyone who passes "poor" judgement on you on your ignored list, you're the one who can't take criticism.

DS must be proud to call you a friend, because you dance to every unfavourable news/discussion about DS.

Why are you still protesting when he has already moved the so-called dirty money from his wallet to an unknown location? Do you want to be sanctioned using "dirty money"?

For my own protection, I'd rather not have anything to do with those coins. Talking about it sucks.

When did I protest? Chipmixer operators are all either arrested or on the run, any past contracts between them and DS is now cancelled and has no affect because they are now criminals, honoring such contract is no longer a right thing to do, such dirty money should go to authorities, we are not outlaws to decide on our own.  If pointing these facts is considered a bad thing here, then we are f**ked.

And the authorities would put the coin inside personal pocket, go on vacation and keep making laws that allows them to keep the so called dirty money.

Stop twerking for the Government!!!

Why are you so interested in other people's money? You haven't answered

This is interesting opinion, how do we know you are not one of them? Yeah I can also ask questions. Main question is, why are you concerned about it and why are you surprised if someone is concerned about people's reputation?

Btw, this twerking is called honesty, we all know what happens when people decide to make their own rules, I mean look at DT, the door is open for anyone, therefore I have decided to check our guests out for suspicious activities, unless you feel you are a member of a private club and nobody has any rights to talk in this club?

That could explain a lot of hostility around here, get over yourselves. The only thing working here is the flag system which I don't know much about it whether it has been abused or not, but lets hope I never have to find that out by myself.

The real case here should be were the applicants being paid for the duration the campaign lasted before closure? If Yes then I don't see any reason why Mrs. A or Mr. B should get bothered about it. But in a case were none was paid and the funds are still escrowed the next is to get all workers paid after that everyone should mind their business and let the escrow funds be. Okay let's say did we know the terms and conditions those funds were escrowed with them?  So it's left for the manager who brought the escrow account to decide what to do with the fund, in a case the campaign comes back then we can say only the manager and escrower will face the penalty to make refund or raised back such funds or possibly if the campaign comes back then they have to pay all participants for the duration of escrowed funds till it being exhausted.
This is just my view.