CRYPTSY stopping withdraw locking accounts without notifying users! Class Action

[vancefox]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

[1715484323]

1715484323

[1715484323]

1715484323

[vancefox]

So when do we see proof of a lawsuit ?

Lawsuit for a probable amount of <$1,000usd in coin... yeah... I can see a lawyer going to jump on that...

[cohnhead]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

[vancefox]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

[cohnhead]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

[vancefox]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

P2P will never successfully be regulated or monitored.  Nature of the transaction.  What I was bringing up is the fact that businesses that conduct transactions using FIAT (not credit which has indentification as an inherent feature) do not have KYC requirements even for products/items that are in excess of 1k usd.  My simple statement plugs holes in Cryptsy's bullshit excuse for needing more identification.

I can walk into Best Buy and purchase as many Samsung UN78JS9500 TVs (on sale at 9999.98usd each as of this post) as I wish for cash but I can't withdraw more than 100usd per month from Cryptsy without telling them who I am, when I was born, where I live, etc?  That shows that their claim of needing said information is bullshit.  So much bullshit, so little time to shovel it.  Limiting FIAT transactions to 0 until verification of identity is in accordance with KYC.  Limiting altcoin transactions to any number above zero shows there is no KYC requirements at all.

My opinion.  Anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass.  

[suchmoon]

The way they ninja-ed these limits onto their users and the unusual silence from the typically verbal BitJohn et al is a good indication that the whole thing is a big stinky pile of cowcrap.

[LeChatNoir]

BigVern ‏@cryptsy 2 h2 ore fa

Markets added:  SHND/BTC, TRBO/BTC, & LGBTQ/BTC



Son of a bitch!
I've no other words for this person!

Still not an explanation from them after almost one month.

[CryptoNick]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

P2P will never successfully be regulated or monitored.  Nature of the transaction.  What I was bringing up is the fact that businesses that conduct transactions using FIAT (not credit which has indentification as an inherent feature) do not have KYC requirements even for products/items that are in excess of 1k usd.  My simple statement plugs holes in Cryptsy's bullshit excuse for needing more identification.

I can walk into Best Buy and purchase as many Samsung UN78JS9500 TVs (on sale at 9999.98usd each as of this post) as I wish for cash but I can't withdraw more than 100usd per month from Cryptsy without telling them who I am, when I was born, where I live, etc?  That shows that their claim of needing said information is bullshit.  So much bullshit, so little time to shovel it.  Limiting FIAT transactions to 0 until verification of identity is in accordance with KYC.  Limiting altcoin transactions to any number above zero shows there is no KYC requirements at all.

My opinion.  Anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass.  

Best Buy isn't paying you and Best Buy pays Quarterly Taxes and Sales Tax there and they report a sale for PnL statements. They have accounting and costs of goods and are not exchanging their TV for BitCoin or giving you an Alt Coin as change for your purchase. They do give rewards though and those are written off as Advertising. But if they gave you Best Buy Alt Coins instead that were speculated on then they might have a different outcome. Even though they would still have to say what the coin is worth and that would be the top end so it stops all speculation on the up side.

The Dollar you give them also had to be reported as income on your Taxes and can be used as a write off if you are buying for a business expense. Just not the same comparison at all. Exchanges are held to a different standard. But this is the problem since the exchange knows exactly how many BitCoin or Alt Coin you sent in, so they would know how much you have lost and or made in trades. Then this amount only should be able to be held.

Since Cryptsy no longer makes money on trades and only on withdrawl technically you could setup a trading system within Cryptsy and pay no fees ever. A merchant would cash out to FIAT and that is it. So you setup a Merchant Account inside Cryptsy and Alt Coin is sent in for Free and the merchant gets an internal transfer to their account for a product and then ships you their product and cashes out to FIAT. Of course there may be no one buying but at least the trades are free. So you could setup a virtual Cryptsy Store and money only goes in and then translates back out to FIAT for the merchant. The coin that is bought inside Cryptsy could be BitCoin only too. Now Cryptsy would handle the Volume to FIAT and BitCoin onlly comes in and Goes out through Cryptsy to FIAT or whoever is willing to buy internally at Cryptsy and face the Transaction barrier or hold and play the market to offset a FIAT transfer fee.

Then Cryptsy takes their proceeds and goes to another exchange to sell lol!

[vancefox]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

P2P will never successfully be regulated or monitored.  Nature of the transaction.  What I was bringing up is the fact that businesses that conduct transactions using FIAT (not credit which has indentification as an inherent feature) do not have KYC requirements even for products/items that are in excess of 1k usd.  My simple statement plugs holes in Cryptsy's bullshit excuse for needing more identification.

I can walk into Best Buy and purchase as many Samsung UN78JS9500 TVs (on sale at 9999.98usd each as of this post) as I wish for cash but I can't withdraw more than 100usd per month from Cryptsy without telling them who I am, when I was born, where I live, etc?  That shows that their claim of needing said information is bullshit.  So much bullshit, so little time to shovel it.  Limiting FIAT transactions to 0 until verification of identity is in accordance with KYC.  Limiting altcoin transactions to any number above zero shows there is no KYC requirements at all.

My opinion.  Anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass.  

Best Buy isn't paying you and Best Buy pays Quarterly Taxes and Sales Tax there and they report a sale for PnL statements. They have accounting and costs of goods and are not exchanging their TV for BitCoin or giving you an Alt Coin as change for your purchase. They do give rewards though and those are written off as Advertising. But if they gave you Best Buy Alt Coins instead that were speculated on then they might have a different outcome. Even though they would still have to say what the coin is worth and that would be the top end so it stops all speculation on the up side.

The Dollar you give them also had to be reported as income on your Taxes and can be used as a write off if you are buying for a business expense. Just not the same comparison at all. Exchanges are held to a different standard. But this is the problem since the exchange knows exactly how many BitCoin or Alt Coin you sent in, so they would know how much you have lost and or made in trades. Then this amount only should be able to be held.

Since Cryptsy no longer makes money on trades and only on withdrawl technically you could setup a trading system within Cryptsy and pay no fees ever. A merchant would cash out to FIAT and that is it. So you setup a Merchant Account inside Cryptsy and Alt Coin is sent in for Free and the merchant gets an internal transfer to their account for a product and then ships you their product and cashes out to FIAT. Of course there may be no one buying but at least the trades are free. So you could setup a virtual Cryptsy Store and money only goes in and then translates back out to FIAT for the merchant. The coin that is bought inside Cryptsy could be BitCoin only too. Now Cryptsy would handle the Volume to FIAT and BitCoin onlly comes in and Goes out through Cryptsy to FIAT or whoever is willing to buy internally at Cryptsy and face the Transaction barrier or hold and play the market to offset a FIAT transfer fee.

Then Cryptsy takes their proceeds and goes to another exchange to sell lol!

Except Cryptsy is not the creator nor the maintainer of the altcoins.  They are merely a slightly more secure forum than raw P2P to exchange said coins between two people.  When they brought in FIAT to exchange for coins then they became a regulated trading platform.  That's the key.  Without FIAT there is no need for KYC.  So if you don't exchange FIAT at all, ever, KYC shouldn't ever hit your doorstep.

Since you disagreed with me... don't forget to kiss my ass.

[Gleb Gamow]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

P2P will never successfully be regulated or monitored.  Nature of the transaction.  What I was bringing up is the fact that businesses that conduct transactions using FIAT (not credit which has indentification as an inherent feature) do not have KYC requirements even for products/items that are in excess of 1k usd.  My simple statement plugs holes in Cryptsy's bullshit excuse for needing more identification.

I can walk into Best Buy and purchase as many Samsung UN78JS9500 TVs (on sale at 9999.98usd each as of this post) as I wish for cash but I can't withdraw more than 100usd per month from Cryptsy without telling them who I am, when I was born, where I live, etc?  That shows that their claim of needing said information is bullshit.  So much bullshit, so little time to shovel it.  Limiting FIAT transactions to 0 until verification of identity is in accordance with KYC.  Limiting altcoin transactions to any number above zero shows there is no KYC requirements at all.

My opinion.  Anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass.  

Since Cryptsy is supposedly abiding by all US laws and statures, exactly why have they opted to have their operation based in Belize under the auspices of an entity located in Florida?

[Hippie Tech]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

P2P will never successfully be regulated or monitored.  Nature of the transaction.  What I was bringing up is the fact that businesses that conduct transactions using FIAT (not credit which has indentification as an inherent feature) do not have KYC requirements even for products/items that are in excess of 1k usd.  My simple statement plugs holes in Cryptsy's bullshit excuse for needing more identification.

I can walk into Best Buy and purchase as many Samsung UN78JS9500 TVs (on sale at 9999.98usd each as of this post) as I wish for cash but I can't withdraw more than 100usd per month from Cryptsy without telling them who I am, when I was born, where I live, etc?  That shows that their claim of needing said information is bullshit.  So much bullshit, so little time to shovel it.  Limiting FIAT transactions to 0 until verification of identity is in accordance with KYC.  Limiting altcoin transactions to any number above zero shows there is no KYC requirements at all.

My opinion.  Anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass. 

Best Buy isn't paying you and Best Buy pays Quarterly Taxes and Sales Tax there and they report a sale for PnL statements. They have accounting and costs of goods and are not exchanging their TV for BitCoin or giving you an Alt Coin as change for your purchase. They do give rewards though and those are written off as Advertising. But if they gave you Best Buy Alt Coins instead that were speculated on then they might have a different outcome. Even though they would still have to say what the coin is worth and that would be the top end so it stops all speculation on the up side.

The Dollar you give them also had to be reported as income on your Taxes and can be used as a write off if you are buying for a business expense. Just not the same comparison at all. Exchanges are held to a different standard. But this is the problem since the exchange knows exactly how many BitCoin or Alt Coin you sent in, so they would know how much you have lost and or made in trades. Then this amount only should be able to be held.

Since Cryptsy no longer makes money on trades and only on withdrawl technically you could setup a trading system within Cryptsy and pay no fees ever. A merchant would cash out to FIAT and that is it. So you setup a Merchant Account inside Cryptsy and Alt Coin is sent in for Free and the merchant gets an internal transfer to their account for a product and then ships you their product and cashes out to FIAT. Of course there may be no one buying but at least the trades are free. So you could setup a virtual Cryptsy Store and money only goes in and then translates back out to FIAT for the merchant. The coin that is bought inside Cryptsy could be BitCoin only too. Now Cryptsy would handle the Volume to FIAT and BitCoin onlly comes in and Goes out through Cryptsy to FIAT or whoever is willing to buy internally at Cryptsy and face the Transaction barrier or hold and play the market to offset a FIAT transfer fee.

Then Cryptsy takes their proceeds and goes to another exchange to sell lol!

Except Cryptsy is not the creator nor the maintainer of the altcoins.  They are merely a slightly more secure forum than raw P2P to exchange said coins between two people.  When they brought in FIAT to exchange for coins then they became a regulated trading platform.  That's the key.  Without FIAT there is no need for KYC.  So if you don't exchange FIAT at all, ever, KYC shouldn't ever hit your doorstep.

Since you disagreed with me... don't forget to kiss my ass.

Where the hell have you been during the last 3 years ?!

Fyi, Cryptsy set the standard when it comes to inhouse shitcoin ponzis and the shitcoin sweatshop that cloned them. lol

See all those mice with the busted right clickers !?

[not.you]

For what it is worth, in order to trade crypto for crypto (no fiat) on Kraken I did have to tell them who I was and where I lived but I never had to provide documentation to prove it.  They don't ask for documentation until you decide to start trading for fiat.  I haven't traded there in a while so I can't recall if there are transfer limits or not.

[vancefox]

Where the hell have you been during the last 3 years ?!

Fyi, Cryptsy set the standard when it comes to inhouse shitcoin ponzis and the shitcoin sweatshop that cloned them. lol

See all those mice with the busted right clickers !?

You're interesting.  Cryptsy provides a method to run a ponzi.  As far as I know they don't actually run a ponzi coin themselves.  Profit from?  Absolutely.

Now with these withdrawal limits and other "KYC" crap for coin withdrawals it does appear that Cryptsy itself may be a ponzi... not just a ponzi facilitator.

[GoldSeal]

Honestly, I don't understand why some people have so much hate for altcoins. There are some decent altcoins out there.

Also, I really don't see cryptsy as an outright ponzi scheme. I think of cryptsy as more of as a poorly coded exchange under the control of a woefully apathetic management team. Frankly, I'm surprised they even lasted this long.

Unfortunately, I think we'll see them last a bit longer though. No matter how bad it gets, I expect there will always be a pack of fanboy idiots that will stick with these imploding exchanges until the end. For example, look at the mcxnow fiasco. There were dozens of lemming traders kissing realsolid's ass all the way up until he fucked them and ran off to Europe.

[owlcatz]

The way they ninja-ed these limits onto their users and the unusual silence from the typically verbal BitJohn et al is a good indication that the whole thing is a big stinky pile of cowcrap.

Mistake me if i'm wrong on the timeline, but doesn't it also all coincide nicely with coinfire's last post about cryptsy? Are they trying to clean house now and get compliant no matter what state people live (Or country)? in? 

[suchmoon]

The way they ninja-ed these limits onto their users and the unusual silence from the typically verbal BitJohn et al is a good indication that the whole thing is a big stinky pile of cowcrap.

Mistake me if i'm wrong on the timeline, but doesn't it also all coincide nicely with coinfire's last post about cryptsy? Are they trying to clean house now and get compliant no matter what state people live (Or country)? in? 

It does coincide indeed. I'm still laughing at the uncanny similarities here:

https://archive.is/ltX3b#selection-369.0-378.0

PayBase is in the process of reviewing its options at this time including what, if any, legal action may be appropriate in response to the Coin Fire article.

https://archive.is/T7q2A#selection-137.0-137.71

We [Cryptsy] will be reviewing our legal options against this libelous article.

[usukan]

I have been watching this thread since it started - and made a few comments along the way

I verified to level 1 when this came in

I have been withdrawing/depositing from Crypsty the whole time with NO PROBLEMS - both before and after the new limits came into play

I have just done a string of alt withdraws - all through in a few minutes

I must conclude that this thread is just bollocks


The story is running thin on me - its bullshit.

The trolls here are just trying to crush Cryptsy - and I guess are paid by another exchange.

Believe what you want  - but the proof is in the pudding........... at least for me

NO - I am not paid by Cryptsy - and not a recent account for a purpose

[CryptoNick]

I don't think it is in the interest of Cryptsy to hold off on withdraws as that's how they make money now it's fee free trading. withdraw fee's I doubt the advertising covers costs, Unless of course they have spent every ones coins and don't give a fuck

While it is fee free trading and the "only" revenue source they claim to be making is withdrawal fees if you don't have the coin to send you have a capital problem; and the only way that I see for them to solve a capital problem is to prevent said capital from leaving your hands (i.e. withdrawal limits).

That is what I believe they are doing: reducing your (and any other non-verified individual) total withdrawal ability to increase total capital to pay out verified individual's withdrawal requests.

I'd love another explanation.  KYC seems to me to be bullshit.  You don't see Best Buy demanding your identification to sell you any of their goods, some of which is way over the value of a single btc.  Why are altcoins, all but one (I think) under 1btc in value each, considered (by Cryptsy) to be high value and then why are they still violating KYC if that's their stance?  That's my question.  I look forward to hearing an answer... but I won't hold my breath.

question , are individuals who want to exchange btc and fiat, or btc and other crypto,  subject to the reporting requirements of kyc anti money laundering rules, or does that fall under some other statute. For some reason I seem recall something about a $3,000 limit for stuff like that. Or is it $10,000 that would need to be reported. ?

KYC is a tricky bitch and I would recommend you ask all questions regarding it to a properly qualified and licensed individual but the general understanding I have is that KYC is not bound to an amount transacted but the type of transaction that occurred:  i.e. banking, gambling, high value products, etc.

person to person transactions look like they may not be subject to kyc...as its not with an institution or conducted by professional intermediaries

saw this on wiki:

For the purposes of a KYC policy, a Customer/user may be defined as:
- a person or entity that maintains an account and/or has a business relationship with the bank;
- one on whose behalf the account is maintained (i.e. the beneficial owner);
- beneficiaries of transactions conducted by professional intermediaries such as stockbrokers, Chartered Accountants, or solicitors, as permitted under the law; or
- any person or entity connected with a financial transaction which can pose significant reputational or other risks to the bank, for example, a wire transfer or issue of a high-value demand draft as a single transaction

P2P will never successfully be regulated or monitored.  Nature of the transaction.  What I was bringing up is the fact that businesses that conduct transactions using FIAT (not credit which has indentification as an inherent feature) do not have KYC requirements even for products/items that are in excess of 1k usd.  My simple statement plugs holes in Cryptsy's bullshit excuse for needing more identification.

I can walk into Best Buy and purchase as many Samsung UN78JS9500 TVs (on sale at 9999.98usd each as of this post) as I wish for cash but I can't withdraw more than 100usd per month from Cryptsy without telling them who I am, when I was born, where I live, etc?  That shows that their claim of needing said information is bullshit.  So much bullshit, so little time to shovel it.  Limiting FIAT transactions to 0 until verification of identity is in accordance with KYC.  Limiting altcoin transactions to any number above zero shows there is no KYC requirements at all.

My opinion.  Anyone who disagrees can kiss my ass.  

Best Buy isn't paying you and Best Buy pays Quarterly Taxes and Sales Tax there and they report a sale for PnL statements. They have accounting and costs of goods and are not exchanging their TV for BitCoin or giving you an Alt Coin as change for your purchase. They do give rewards though and those are written off as Advertising. But if they gave you Best Buy Alt Coins instead that were speculated on then they might have a different outcome. Even though they would still have to say what the coin is worth and that would be the top end so it stops all speculation on the up side.

The Dollar you give them also had to be reported as income on your Taxes and can be used as a write off if you are buying for a business expense. Just not the same comparison at all. Exchanges are held to a different standard. But this is the problem since the exchange knows exactly how many BitCoin or Alt Coin you sent in, so they would know how much you have lost and or made in trades. Then this amount only should be able to be held.

Since Cryptsy no longer makes money on trades and only on withdrawl technically you could setup a trading system within Cryptsy and pay no fees ever. A merchant would cash out to FIAT and that is it. So you setup a Merchant Account inside Cryptsy and Alt Coin is sent in for Free and the merchant gets an internal transfer to their account for a product and then ships you their product and cashes out to FIAT. Of course there may be no one buying but at least the trades are free. So you could setup a virtual Cryptsy Store and money only goes in and then translates back out to FIAT for the merchant. The coin that is bought inside Cryptsy could be BitCoin only too. Now Cryptsy would handle the Volume to FIAT and BitCoin onlly comes in and Goes out through Cryptsy to FIAT or whoever is willing to buy internally at Cryptsy and face the Transaction barrier or hold and play the market to offset a FIAT transfer fee.

Then Cryptsy takes their proceeds and goes to another exchange to sell lol!

Except Cryptsy is not the creator nor the maintainer of the altcoins.  They are merely a slightly more secure forum than raw P2P to exchange said coins between two people.  When they brought in FIAT to exchange for coins then they became a regulated trading platform.  That's the key.  Without FIAT there is no need for KYC.  So if you don't exchange FIAT at all, ever, KYC shouldn't ever hit your doorstep.

Since you disagreed with me... don't forget to kiss my ass.

I only disagree with your analogy of Best Buy and Cryptsy and I never said Cryptsy creates the alt coin only that if Best Buy did that they would have different scrutiny. You are right about the FIAT at Cryptsy, never disagreed on that. I think most people would rather pay the trading fees than deal with restrictions. I was offering a funny work around to defeat Cryptsy's new standards. It would be like sending your coin into a black hole but getting a merchant to sign on and use the API to accept payments internally would be the tweak. Total nonsense but funny since the idea would make Cryptsy have to go to another exchange to sell their bitcoin since they would be the only ones buying with FIAT.

Oh wait I take that back, Cryptsy did create an Alt Coin... Cryptsy Points. It is their coin and market. They used those Cryptsy Points to Launder their fraudulent MN2 market shares.

[Spoetnik]

Honestly, I don't understand why some people have so much hate for altcoins. There are some decent altcoins out there.

Also, I really don't see cryptsy as an outright ponzi scheme. I think of cryptsy as more of as a poorly coded exchange under the control of a woefully apathetic management team. Frankly, I'm surprised they even lasted this long.

Unfortunately, I think we'll see them last a bit longer though. No matter how bad it gets, I expect there will always be a pack of fanboy idiots that will stick with these imploding exchanges until the end. For example, look at the mcxnow fiasco. There were dozens of lemming traders kissing realsolid's ass all the way up until he fucked them and ran off to Europe.

- Honestly, I don't understand why some people have so much hate for altcoins.

Really ? A trail of victims leaving a stinky mess by vile horrendous people
destroying the very concept of crypto including Bitcoin and you have no idea why ?
i am flabbergasted you would say that. (what's wrong with Altcoins he says in the SCAM Sub-Forum LOLOLOL)

Like that is not even funny.. are you that naive to what has gone down across the world the last few years ?
Maybe it's because you have no clue what so ever what goes on behind closed doors ?
I know most of the coin coders well and have watched them all pull brutal sleazy stunt after stunt.

- Also, I really don't see cryptsy as an outright ponzi scheme.
Let me guess your one of those "i never had a problem with them.." guys ?
Famous last words with Cryptsy over the years... and Mt.Gox !

- I think of cryptsy as more of as a poorly coded exchange under the control of a woefully apathetic management team.

That is EXACTLY what Mt. Gox was with their custom back end and fractional reserve system.
They had to rob Peter to pay Paul until it collapsed and when it got close and Mark knew the gig was up he posted lies online
blaming hackers for stealing all the money then closed the doors with no warning taking peoples money..
THEN he later had his lawyer make a statement saying he found a usb drive in his couch with over 100000 Bitcoins.
AKA: he lied and his lawyer *obviously convinced him to come clean (about running off with the money)

All that panned out because Mark set up the operation like that and it had one inevitable outcome.
He HAD to rip everyone off.. or in the end come clean and pay *some people (some would still get ripped off)
I think Mark's intentions were honest right up to close to the end.
His Magic Trading card web site (exchange) was never deigned properly though..
so ?
Do you see Mt. Gox as a ponzi scheme ? Well see what i said about Cryptsy above

You are right when you said this though..
- I expect there will always be a pack of fanboy idiots that will stick with these imploding exchanges until the end

I started like in 2012/2013 doing this stuff and i already knew on day 1 that Gox had a VERY bad reputation (like Cryptsy)
And it only got worse over time and no matter what like you said.. idiots would cheer lead for them (contrarians)
People who feel compulsive and obsessed to take the opposing stance and argue even in the face of facts / testimony.

Bottom line is Cryptsy has always been secretive so we just don't know what goes on behind closed doors !

@vancefox
Ahh i see.. with that small an amount of money i would guess no (no class action lawsuit)
I had Paypal rip me off for about 5k usd withdrawing from BTC-E and i DID hire a lawyer (and got my money back)
and i had to pay for that out of pocket too
So i doubt these guys whining about Cryptsy will do anything LOL