and if someone pays me from a coinvalidated known blackmarket, directly to my exchange wallet ( i  often have payment go directly to my ewallet )

what will happen to me? what will happen to my funds?

Take it easy, man.
It might be a misunderstanding going on here

The Bitcoin Foundation starting to show its true colors..

I do not think they are lobbying for Bitcoin user's best interests, but instead to promote their own agenda.

blacklisting/redlisting will destroy Bitcoin.

the real question is, can it even been done?

destructive?
coinvalidation is not government, they are business advisors.
it will only affect users who are silly enough to withdraw funds from a coinvalidated known blackmarket and directly put funds into a exchange to withdraw into fiat..

the service wont ask you to register all of YOUR pubkeys. it is purely a database for good and bad businesses. so there are many ways YOU can mix your coins before entering or exiting a market/business

wrong.
government do not ask people to write their name and post code on every bank note they use. all they ask is businesses receiving large amounts or amounts from black listed entities to be refused service and/or reported.

banks can check serial numbers and see that one day 2 years ago that bank note may have come from the whore house in las vegas. it wont show the identity of everyone using the coins in between.

the same applies to coinvalidation
they will have a database of complying businesses and hopefully find the addresses of atlantis/silkroad and other underground services. then shops can check to see if funds came from legit businesses, were mined or came RECENTLY from underground services. to access the risk of accepting the funds

i tried to avoid alot of waffle in the last post, but it seems more explanation is needed so, replying to all the people that read a newspaper and take what is wrote as gospel:

STOP, CALM DOWN, RELAX.

now let me explain more detail of what my last post did not explain.
ignore the Forbes newspaper article and peoples opinions on what it means for bitcoin users. because it only causes chinese whispers.

now then:
coinvalidation does NOT want identification from every bitcoin USER link: https://coinvalidation.com/PDF_FOR_BITCOIN_USERS.pdf
coin validation wants to advise bitcoin businesses on how to become FIAT compliant, which will only affect bitcoin businesses that exchange bitcoin for DOLLARS, either for customers or for their own internal business needs. link: https://coinvalidation.com/PDF_FOR_BITCOIN_BUSINESSES.pdf

part of this is to build up a database of clean addresses of legitimate and compliant BUSINESSES not users. and a lidt of known black market withdrawal addresses.
this is so that while the "anonymous cash" still is not directly linked to an identity, government can see the source of the cash.
EG is it just 2 hops away from being mined. is it just 2 hops from being sourced from a compliant and legitimate business (clean addresses) or is it just 2 hops from a known black market.

now a bit deeper detail
everyone knows that there are only 12million coins thus far , and that in 2012 silk road transacted more then this amount over the year, meaning a large majority of well circulated coins has at some point been tainted atleast once.

this means that exchanges (being the central points of cashing in-out, profiting, etc, etc) would have alot of their mixed up pot of funds showing up as tainted. this does not make them dirty or illegal.

all coinvalidation want to do is to have a database of fully compliant BUSINESS public keys so that when customers withdraw funds, and use them elsewhere, shops can see that they were sourced from a legitimate exchange, a miner or another legitimate business.

giving the shops the freedom to accept other coins based on the taint level risk
EG if a coin is only 1 hop away from a known silk road address, they can refuse service if they chose to, based on the risk.

it is not about identifying the world population and investigating every user. only those that want to deal with FIAT, which has never changed for decades of government rules

now take your tin foil hats off,
if you actually read the government compliance rules (most established countries rules are very similar) governments do not accept/ reject/investigate every fiat transaction of every business. they request businesses to assess the risk and if deemed obvious as illegally used funds, to then and only then report it to serious crimes departments of government. this puts the onus on businesses to say
"hang on these coins are only 1 hop away from a silk road pubkey" and for the business to then look into the risk of it being a 'serious crime' before sending or not sending info to the government.

EG (A) pawnbroker in detroit. some guy comes in with a $20 bill that literally smells of drugs, he wants to buy a bit of bling. risk level of serious crime: low, requirement for AMLKYC: no
EG (B) pawnbroker in detroit. some guy comes in with a $20,000 of bills  he wants to buy a gold bar. risk level of serious crime: low Requirement of AMLKYC: yes
EG (C) pawnbroker in detroit. some guy comes in with a $20,000 of bills that smelled of drugs and he wants to buy a gold bar. risk level of serious crime: high Requirement of AMLKYC: yes

(A)the pawn broker would accept or reject the $20 based on risk, no ID required, much like any shop selling cigarettes, grocerys, etc.
(B)the pawn broker would ask for ID and other info from the $20k sale, still letting it through after the pawn broker does a quick check that the $20k serial numbers are not blacklisted.
(C)the pawn broker would request ID and check serial numbers of the drug tainted notes and make the decision to either refuse service, to report the customer, or to accept the risk and allow the sale. (third option is ill advised as it could affect the businesses licence status).

the coinvalidation service is not about getting people to write their name and zipcode onto every banknote they use, meaning that coinvalidation is not asking for identity information from every transaction and every public key.

they just want to build up a BUSINESS listing of known legit businesses and illecit businesses thus able to trace back where the funds originated.

One is enough isn't it? 

Compared to some people on this board we are not big holders, unfortunately.

We just were on the fence about how much to buy at $48 like a week or two before the April run up and did not put much money into it then. It was a bit unnerving buying any back then and we did not take advantage of the opportunity like I wish we would have.  I keep telling my husband every day, "I wish we would have bought more sooner."  He is getting sick of hearing it now. 

Hubby,  you know what I am going to say about all this right?  Why didn't we buy more sooner?  

I know.  I just need to shut-up and be thankful for the coin we have and enjoy the ride.  It is just starting to speed up it looks like!

I don't have the numbers off hand to back this up, but it seems like the April-May rise would have been seriously affected by such a sell even for a few hours.  This time around it's almost like these dumps don't happen.

Am I crazy for feeling this to be the case?

Yup, was 415. Still a nice little sell-off

and yet it bounced RIGHT back up to 430.

Whoa, where did those walls come from?

Unfortunately I do not have a time machine like everyone else on bitcointalk. Like I said earlier when we see the top, I am sure everyone on this forum will post they sold within $10 of the top.

Meanwhile where is your trade log showing how you doubled the amount of coins you owned through trading? Perhaps you can use your time machine to go back in time and fix that?

“This needs to exist for regulators to approve of use of Bitcoin in the U.S.,” says Waters. “We don’t want to be the sheriff of the Bitcoin community. We just want to create an ecosystem of clean addresses.”

In the short term, they talk about a limited database that keeps track only of registered identities and their activities with participating companies, but it’s obvious that their ambitions are grander and that a longer term prospect is to take advantage of the transparency of the Bitcoin system to keep track of which Bitcoin is tainted by associations with black markets. Waters says that the development of that aspect will depend on “community feedback.”

If I have understood correctly it´s up to miners/pools which version of bitcoinid they will accept / take in use. I hope all privacy violating possible future versions will be rejected and development will be taken over. There are talented people all over the world to replace the gore dev team if required.