I'm sure since there seems to be a huge amount of impotent vaginas dead-set against rolling back the transactions, such an exchange would be wildly popular.
Great, unfortunately your reply is out of topic.
No one is saying in this thread that doing a rollback is bad, so you are reacting against something that no one said.
The topic is : people compare MtGox to other financial exchanges to justify that a rollback is a normal measure in case of mistrade.
But the same people also forget that financial exchanges operate under strict financial supervision, which gives the guaranty to all the market participants that the rollback is indeed legit, and performed according to neutral and fair rules. It is also a common practice to disclose the identity of the requestor of the rollback.
If you pick up one end of a stick, you pick up the other end as well.
If MtGox does not want to report to the financial authorities, the community can emulate this role.
This is why I am asking the full disclosure of the identity of the beneficiary of the rollback so that we can check that the beneficiary is not MtGox itself.
Getting back 8M USD versus disclosing this info looks like a decent trade off.
And that will allow MtGox to wash themselves from the growing suspicions that they are acting out of personal interest.
"Let the free market decide" indeed.
It seems that most people here are completely misunderstanding what financial regulation is.
Financial authorities do not attempt to freedom of the market any more than road safety authorities attempt to the freedom of movement.
They just make sure that things are smooth, and that the road does not turn into a sequel madmax.
To give a more practical exemple, the bitcoin network is playing the role of the regulatory authority on the very specific topics of the monetary policy (how fast the money supply is growing), the ledger maintenance, and the transaction network. Is it a bad thing just because it is a regulation? Obviously not. Bitcoin would already have gone belly up without that consistency self-check.
Please be objective: Bitcoin is a currency and a monetary system, but it is not a market, it is not a full fledged economy, it is not every other wonderful properties people are day-dreaming.
Bitcoin may be self contained as a currency and a monetary system, but it still needs to interface with the real economy, and the dominant fiat currencies and monetary systems. And if it wants to interface, and to have some credibility and leverage in the real world economy, it has to play by the rules when it comes to trading real-world assets.
Does no one realize the irony of espousing an unregulated, "free" market and then crying foul when an entity doesn't play by the rules you assumed they were?
I may repeat myself, but Bitcoin is not a market, it is a currency. You can espouse an auto-regulated (and non unregulated) decentralized currency, and yet want to trade on a regulated (which does not preclude free) market.
Also, seriously, how can you feel you are consistent when you claim that MtGox is a free market..??
Would a free market improvise new trading rules without prior notice?
Would a free market treat people differently depending on whether they are small or big clients?
Would a free market blame publicly one counterpart and protect the identity of the other?
Would a free market practice desinformation?
Would a free market implement a dark pool in first place?
MtGox is the perfect antithesis of a free market! How can you call that a free market??
Freedom of expression does not imply that I can defame people.
Freedom of movement does not imply that I can enter in a private property without authorization.
Freedom of enterprise does not imply that I can scam my clients.
Freedom does not mean anachy.
A free market is still accountable.