or simply split the loss on the whole system?
Instead of taking from them 12% of their btc, can't you take like 2% from every altcoin also including litecoin? yes everyone will be touched but at least the damage will be less on those who had big amounts of bitcoins.
Then go exchange those coins on other exchangers and get most btc back?
I'm sure you're ordinarily a smart guy/girl but that has to be the stupidest ideas I've heard in 517 days! "BTC was stolen so let's take a slice of every altcoin at the exchange?" Did you exchange 12 mazacoins for some peyote with the elders today?? |
|
|
|
The transparency is excellent
The issue can be fixed via debt-to-equity swap (issueing shares)
The whole thing gives me the creeps because it is not clear which other marketplaces can have the exact same problem without us knowing. We need a marketplace that got actual real world deposit insurance and regular auditing by an external auditing firm.
Not regulation, but insurance and auditing is key.
Pray tell, what was OP being transparent about? Exactly how much BTC was lost? (xxxxxx.xxxxxxxx) What the transaction IDs are? More useful information? etc |
|
|
|
OP.. you said this just a couple of days ago: "One more thing--about security. Very few Poloniex accounts have been hacked--less than five, I think--but I still think reminders like this don't hurt. ... This is money we're talking about, which means people will always be trying to steal it. " When someone asked you about security you avoided it https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=420836.msg5471836#msg5471836- There's nothing visible about security on your website or FAQ
- It does not appear that you have anyone to secure the website and will be looking to hire someone 'later'
- when asked about site security you appear to have avoided the question. Isn't this important to discuss?
Further, per your own Terms you are legally liable for the loss that has occurred. You have a very short Terms page. Big mistake. It says only, "You agree not to hold Poloniex liable for any loss of funds resulting from incorrect information provided by you. " which means you are liable for other losses. Though you say, "These terms and conditions may be changed at any time without notice. By continuing to use the services provided by Poloniex.com, you agree to any and all such changes." it would not apply to previous agreements. I'm guessing you were an easy target for hackers because you did not have much security. You did not therefore do your best to secure the deposits of clients. And you are liable for the loss. I'm sure the good folks here would not think of suing you (and neither would I) but you may want to CYA. |
|
|
|
|
It's amazing that people are saying "Yes! We have all of the information we need about this incident. You've been transparent enough. Now let us send you more BTC for our shares!"
rather than, "We'd like more detailed information about this incident in order to make a more informed decision."
Amazing...
|
|
|
|
I traded my BTC down to 1 satoshi (for AuroraCoin!) so I guess you can't freeze 1/8th of that?  So far I like, and very much so, the transparent way that the Poloniex founder is dealing with this issue. Hoping for more good things from this site. Everyone has growing pains. Learn from them. The right time to hire a security programmer is when you 1) own an exchange; and 2) hear about security issues at the biggest exchange and hear the Bitcoin community talk about double-spending; and 3) hear about security issues at other exchanges OP had a few weeks++ to lock the site down and make it secure. Hiring someone after these issues are resolved (what? 1 month? 2 months? and have more BTC stolen?) is not the way to go. |
|
|
|
|
Will someone who is depositing money right now (because there's no VISIBLE NOTICE on the site regarding the situation) also have their BTC deducted?
If no, then what is the exact time you are using for the "cut off"? 1 hour after theft? 10 hours? This makes no sense, especially when it appears you are still taking deposits.
If yes, are you serious?
|
|
|
|
|
Please add: "Provide detailed and complete information about the incident so that we may make a more informed decision"
|
|
|
|
One anonymous poster vouching for another?
"If he was a thief he could easily have..." could apply to anyone before they do something wrong. But anyway.
It's a good exchange, sure. And I hope that all is the way that is said. I'm just suggesting that we not automatically assume that everything anonymous people say on the internet is true, especially when it comes to money.
You can check the thread history for him on here asking for help on how to retrieve BTC from a customer's wallet however, that is very real. Yes, that's very nice. There are plenty of posts from Mark Karpeles being helpful too. We don't have the whole story yet (even if the first post is 100% true) because it has not been provided to us. |
|
|
|
[snips throughout[
it really wouldn't be fair to deduct deposits made after the BTC was taken.
Obviously I should have posted a notice on the Balances page, but it is not difficult to make an exception for recent deposits.
I will be hiring a security programmer after this is dealt with.
You have NOT posted a VERY VISIBLE post on your website. This means people are still unknowingly sending you money. I consider this dishonest. Hiring a security programmer after this is dealt with? You need one NOW not later. "it really wouldn't be fair to deduct deposits made after the BTC was taken."... why not? |
|
|
|
|
Here's the way I see it. One of these is true. I hope it's the first one.
1) OP is 100% honest [great] <---- this is what we all want. But we don't always get to go to Disneyland, kids.
2) OP is partially honest [not bad, but still okay. Not a sign of theft. Theft is more clever and thought-out, like #3]
3) Impose a Cyprus-style "tax" on deposits. Suggest raising fees in order to make up the difference.
4) Impose a Cyprus-style "tax" on deposits. Suggest raising fees in order to make up the difference, hoping that someone else (perhaps a friend) will suggest a share offering to get even more BTC [steal money, then get people to hand it over]
Once OP gives us more evidence and detail about what happened, #1 becomes more likely.
Openness, honesty, and transparency dictates an honest OP.
If this doesn't happen, or this post is shouted down (if organically or by friends of OP there's no way to know) then I think 4 is more likely.
|
|
|
|
Guys, I want to vouch personally for Busoni, a week or two ago I had accidentally deposited .6 BTC into my PMC wallet by mistake on Polo. Busoni personally went out of the way to retrieve it for me, even coming to Bitcointalk to seek help on how to solve the issue. If he was a thief he could easily have said, "sorry there is no fix" and run off with it himself. I thought my money was lost but he came through and i'm sure he will come through again for everyone affected by this mess.
One anonymous poster vouching for another? "If he was a thief he could easily have..." could apply to anyone before they do something wrong. But anyway. It's a good exchange, sure. And I hope that all is the way that is said. I'm just suggesting that we not automatically assume that everything anonymous people say on the internet is true, especially when it comes to money. |
|
|
|
Love all the negativity in the forum. You guys are just great!
Busoni, in regards to your post on your site I just wanted to put my vote in for shares/dividend payments. I think this would be the route to go over increased fees.
In any case, I think Polo is one of my favorite exchanges for the alts. Shit happens, at least you took responsibility and opened up to the community as soon as this happened. I will still certainly trade there.
A careful eye is far from negative. It is foolhardy to blindly trust what an anonymous person types on a computer. Why should we automatically trust someone just because they put a few nice paragraphs together? I want my BTC back as much as the next person but until I have 100% of it, I'm not buying it. I think what we've seen from Mt.Gox where you have a very public figure like Mark is that you can't really trust anyone in this baby market. That being said anytime I move coins onto exchanges I know that I'm taking a risk irregardless of whether or not the person running the exchange is "anonymous". Although I don't know if it's confirmed, I have seen the addresses of the attacker posted. That hasn't been confirmed by Busoni *yet*, but I would hope that information would come out soon. Having coins on any online service is a gamble, don't gamble with more than you can afford to lose. Someone that is anonymous is more likely to consider/implement wrong-doing than someone who isn't, I think. There are always exceptions, of course. But I'll take the law of assumed averages for the above statement any day. |
|
|
|
Hi Busoni,
As a response to your asking for information and ideas. I would like to suggest taking the shares and dividends route. Giving value back to your impacted customers will inevitably boost your reputation and trust in your exchange.
This will be more beneficial to Poloniex than you can imagine, and will resolve the issue in a relatively short space of time.
I would also suggest (from a programming background) hiring someone, potentially with these shares if they will accept them, to try and find holes in the security and strengthen the exchanges security. It is possible to do it yourself but sometimes when your head is stuck in the job it's difficult to notice these things. I do not have the skillset to be able to do this but there are people out there, professional security firms, who will make this extremely robust for a fee.
If you need any help communicating, or a point of contact if you are busy, myself and others have been informing people of the situation who weren't aware.
Ignore the negativity this is natural from such a situation and other "exchanges" have left a bitter taste of skepticism with people. Be the first to break this mold and you will find even more people come to the exchange.
I hope this helps
Darktrix
More evidence (detailed and specific) of the "outside theft" (if it actually occurred) should be required before we give more BTC away, don't you think? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... |
|
|
|
Love all the negativity in the forum. You guys are just great!
Busoni, in regards to your post on your site I just wanted to put my vote in for shares/dividend payments. I think this would be the route to go over increased fees.
In any case, I think Polo is one of my favorite exchanges for the alts. Shit happens, at least you took responsibility and opened up to the community as soon as this happened. I will still certainly trade there.
A careful eye is far from negative. It is foolhardy to blindly trust what an anonymous person types on a computer. Why should we automatically trust someone just because they put a few nice paragraphs together? I want my BTC back as much as the next person but until I have 100% of it, I'm not buying it. I'd also be happy with a YouTube video from the founder explaining the situation, and further evidence of what happened. |
|
|
|
Their "problems" sound like complete BULLSHIT
I think something very fishy is going on here.
It was bullshit on February 26 and it's still BULLSHIT. It's all bs. It was always bs |
|
|
|
Sorry, but I'm not buying any of this. The thing with Gox setting a precedent is that each successive Goxer learns from the last. I want to believe them, I really do. But I said the same thing about Coinmarket https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=454186.msg5375246#msg5375246 and no one wanted to believe it could happen to their "favorite" exchange. It sounded like BS then and where is Coinmarket now? This doesn't mean that it's not possible for an exchange to get hacked. But I think we should TRUST NO ONE. Especially when they are anonymous. Another exchange was "hacked" today. Nearly 900 BTC "lost". It just seems all too convenient. Yes, it's more profitable on the long run to run and exchange instead of stealing customer funds. But if you can get away with stealing a little, why not? I'm not saying that is what happened here but who knows. |
|
|
|
Why is there no notice on the Poloniex website of this? Did I miss it?
Notice was on twitter box, right side of site. ... and that's an official notice? A few words off to the side? This should be PLASTERED all over the header. |
|
|
|
Why is this coin stagnating?
People are too busy looking for a quick Bit with Aurora (and now Maza) Such frenzy has brought down many of the coins traded on Mintpal and Poloniex, I think |
|
|
|
|
Why is there no notice on the Poloniex website of this? Did I miss it?
|
|
|
|
|
Here's my theory about the price for Karma today...
And it has everything to do with Auroracoin. Mintpal is the main exchange for Karmacoin. It seems that other coins that were heavily-traded before (like MINT, or even BC) are now down. People seem to be selling their positions in other coins (and deciding to hold off on purchasing) in order to get in on the Auroracoin train.
That's my armchair theory, at least.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
