BitWhisk.io ✦ new Bitcoin mixing service ✦ testers evaluations

[bill gator]

Sorry for my absence; I’m just going back through my list of subscribed threads and coming back to this. I know it won’t be a problem, but I’ll mix a few coins using a nested P2SH SegWit address and post the results here. 3MCJBtW2uhvm7BJMtc4yxQUhGKoqD7q12x

I'm in a similar boat to Joe. I haven't forgotten about you guys either. I was around for the initial round of testing I believe and I wrote up a nice review about how enjoyable the UI looked on mobile devices (iOS, more specifically). I have also come back to mix some coins through your service, because it's unfortunate that you gave people coins specifically to test Nested SegWit addresses and nobody did so. I sent .002 through, with a delay and a custom fee. No problems thus far, very clean, very responsive and transparent. I can really see you guys becoming a bigger name in this niche. I would like to see a bigger maximum mix, but I can understand that you're working with limited capital from the beginning. I wouldn't mind accepting a reward, but I certainly am not expecting one, either. 

[1714953900]

1714953900

[1714953900]

1714953900

[BitWhisk.io]

Wow, a lot of activity for the past week. Will be glad to answer all questions.

I have tried to send some bitcoin for testing, but I cannot get past the popup dialogue that asks me to confirm that the address will only be valid for 24 hours. I am on an iPad, and nothing happens when I click the “Accept” button, nor when I click the “x” to close out the dialogue.

I just refreshed the page and tried again. This time it was successful. I have set a delay of 5 hours for my $10 transaction. I will update this thread again once the tumbling is complete and I receive the chips to the address I provided.

We have been doing updates on the server that time 
Looks like a coincidence: you clicked "Accept" button right at the moment when we were changing the backend code. It is the only reason I can think of.

A quick note: what is the point of adding the amount before the payment screen? The payment screen just instructs me to send a minimum/maximum amount of bitcoin, which is contradictory to the btc amount field in the previous screen.  Is it just a reference to see what our return will be after the mixing procedure?

Let me explain, the calculator is aimed to help you to configure the order, e.g. set the proper percent distribution (if you need a specific amount transferred to some of the addresses) etc. It is completely optional, we do not send to server the values of calculator input fields. It does not play any role in the order registration. Moreover, we do not need to know the exact amount of coins you are going to send to our wallet. You can send anything between minimum and maximum constraints.

Hence, the answer on your last question is "definetely, yes"

Hello! I've recently used .001 BTC from a Nested SegWit address (3 Address) and it made it back to me successfully. I had no problem setting my own fee, getting a custom delay and I made it through the UI on the website without flaw. The fees are minimal, and the mixing looks pretty solid as well. I don't know if you are handing out rewards for using your service as you have mentioned to Joe, but I thought it would be nice to use your service for my own tests and report back here.

Dear EthanB, first of all we are glad you didn't come across and decided to test our service with your own coins, thanks. It is truly encouraging for us.

This review campaign lasts for more than a month now. First time, people took our coins, tested mixer and posted reviews, but the last two weeks something has changed: 4-5 persons took btc from us and disappeared. We still have some people that promised to test the service and post a review and we hope they'll do so. Still, this review campaign is coming to an end.

The main (and the only one) problem with our service is that we do not have enough coins in the reserve (otherwise, of course, I would send you these 0.001BTC). However, we do not lose heart and very soon we will run a signature campaign for two weeks and try to attract some investors. Yes, yes, I understand it may sound hopeless, but we really put a lot of effort in creating this service. We designed it with love and passion and want to be active on the market. Hence, lets see what results this future sig campaign brings.

I have not yet tried a Native SegWit address, is this something that your service has implemented?

Yes, during this month we have implemented a lot of things and improved the service a bit.
In particular, we support receiving from and sending to bech32 (see BitCryptex second review).

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[BTCforJoe]

After the 5hr delay I configured for this tumble, I have received my coins with no issues. I used a nested SegWit address to fund the mix, and received it to a nested SegWit address, as well. I went to check the status of my order after my coins were sent to me, and I’m glad to know that there was no reference to the order on your servers. After utilizing the service once, I must say that it is an extremely simple service to use; it’s the simplest out of all the mixers I have previously used.

Needless to say, but I will anyways: I have added this to the list of mixers that I use on a regular basis.

No need to send me any rewards for providing my experience. I just hope that this service is a continued one, and a profitable venture for you. You’ve got my vouch, so I hope you truly take the opportunity to gain some trust and reputation! Great addition to the privacy aspect of bitcoin!

[BitWhisk.io]

Dear Bill and Joe,

we are glad to obtain such nice reviews from you! Today we have started our official ann thread and quoted both of you there. So, the testing time has mainly passed.

We have a lot of plans for future development, including introducing another mixing mode and adding more cryptocurrencies. However, we need more coins in the reserve for that purpose. Hope our future signature campaign will attract some investors from the forum.

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[Sellingaccs]

Are you still in need of testers?
I know im just a Jr. Member, but im willing to try with my own coins.
How much would i have to pay in fees to mix, as i'd try with few mBTC, so i'd like to know how much in tx fees i have to pay and service fee in total.

[BitWhisk.io]

Are you still in need of testers?

Dear Sellingaccs, of course, it would be great if you test the service.

How much would i have to pay in fees to mix, as i'd try with few mBTC, so i'd like to know how much in tx fees i have to pay and service fee in total.

Generally speaking, you choose service commission, it varies from 0.5 to 3 percents. You also control miner's fee rate for outcoming transactions. The total fee is thus estimated via calculator provided to you on the order page, feel free to use it.

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[Paractor]

Are you still in need of testers?

Dear Sellingaccs, of course, it would be great if you test the service.

If you are still in need of testers let me know if I would be accepted to try.
Are you still giving the bounty base amount to test your service?

[BitWhisk.io]

If you are still in need of testers let me know if I would be accepted to try.
Are you still giving the bounty base amount to test your service?

Dear Paractor, it is a pity you came too late.

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[bill gator]

For what it is worth, the delay worked and the custom fee worked as well. I like that you have set a maximum fee of 3%, because that saves anybody from accidentally giving you an absurd fee on accident. Your website has been very user friendly so far, and I've received back my coins without fault.

I have to admit that I was extremely skeptical at first, but I'm looking forward to seeing your site develop further and participate in future testing if need be. The way you performed testing was very generous and interesting.

I have my reservations and will most likely not have this as my primary mixer, for simple reasons such as the maximum is too low and this gives me a bit of a concern still. The idea that there is such limited funds involved in this project makes me fear that it may vanish at any time. The signature campaign will ease these concerns a bit, because the funds required for that are quite significant if you're running a campaign to any worthwhile degree. I think an increase in funds, maximum mix and forum presence in the form of a signature campaign without low-quality participants would go a long way towards increasing your reputation.

[BitWhisk.io]

For what it is worth, the delay worked and the custom fee worked as well. I like that you have set a maximum fee of 3%, because that saves anybody from accidentally giving you an absurd fee on accident. Your website has been very user friendly so far, and I've received back my coins without fault.

I have to admit that I was extremely skeptical at first, but I'm looking forward to seeing your site develop further and participate in future testing if need be. The way you performed testing was very generous and interesting.

Thanks for testing, Bill.

I have my reservations and will most likely not have this as my primary mixer, for simple reasons such as the maximum is too low and this gives me a bit of a concern still. The idea that there is such limited funds involved in this project makes me fear that it may vanish at any time. The signature campaign will ease these concerns a bit, because the funds required for that are quite significant if you're running a campaign to any worthwhile degree. I think an increase in funds, maximum mix and forum presence in the form of a signature campaign without low-quality participants would go a long way towards increasing your reputation.

Yes, we understand your concerns, we started our campaign couple of days ago.

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[bill gator]

Yes, we understand your concerns, we started our campaign couple of days ago.

Yikes. I'm not so sure you do understand my concerns. I'm not so sure you understand what reasonable concerns should be in this scenario, either. Unfortunately the very first thing I see when I click that link is :

Code:

Trust: -16: -4 / +0
Warning: Trade with extreme caution! 

That is not a comforting sign when a new service is popping it's head into the market. The campaign manager you have selected for your campaign is somebody that has been banned in the past. This is a new account they have created, and thus they are evading a currently standing ban. What this means for you, is that your account manager could very easily disappear at any moment. Ban evasion is a banable offense AFAIK, so if they do get banned I wouldn't expect your funds to be returned; Especially considering the fact that their original ban was due to begging through unsolicited PMs.

Out of pure curiosity, what criteria were considered when choosing a manager for your signature campaign? I'm wondering if you have read these threads or any other threads in accusation or connection to your manager -

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1528178.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1073373

It seems rather hypocritical that you cannot have negative trust in order to be a participant in the signature campaign, however the campaign manager has multiple, valid negative trusts. I presume you are paying this user, so I can only think to ask one question; why?

Originally there was a merit requirement on this thread, but that was removed and I can't imagine a reason other than it being similarly hypocritical, as the manager has never received merit, either.

For example, I just took a peek at a single accepted campaign participate jakezyrus (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1080167) and what I found should not make you happy in the slightest. They have never received a single merit point, which can be overlooked if their posting habits are just being overlooked by those without merit to give. This is not the case though, because a look through their most recent posts shows their last 3-posts (linked below) are all the 1000th+ reply in a megathread, buried deep within the depths in spam. One of them is actually the 2500th+ reply, so that's even more egregious. Spoiler alert, their posts don't get better as you keep digging. Would any one of their posts be the type of post or the type of exposure you are looking to accrue or pay for?

In fact, not a single one of the accepted participants have received a single merit since it has been implemented. This should stand out when you have multiple hero members posting in your campaign. One of the accepted participants has only posted twice in the past 3-months and one of the posts was their application to your campaign.

The lack of judgement here is really off-putting from my perspective. I would have liked to have seen a more reputable manager, accepting higher quality participants with less hypocritical and more discriminatory rules/criteria. In my opinion, it is much better to be extremely selective in this process. This is your business, and I'm sure you would like to see it succeed; you will do more harm than good if you allow this signature campaign, with this manager and these participants play out as it currently is. I'm honestly here to help you and be as straightforward as I possibly can. What questions and criteria did you use to set-up the framework for this signature campaign?

The biggest question here is : Do you see anything I have mentioned as a problem?

[BTCforJoe]

Although we are going a bit off-topic here, I feel it's still valid, as this is an evaluation thread for a service/site that you wanted feedback for.

Signature campaigns are effective, yes. But they are only as effective as the users that are a part of that campaign. Generally speaking, you're not going to find much use for 25 users to be a part of your campaign if the majority of them are 3rd-world shitposters that spam the wrong parts of the forum. The areas in which your participants post need to target your services. Chance are that Bitcoin Discussion doesn't warrant the need to display your ad, as it's generally filled with 3rd-world sig spammers who don't see a value in mixing coins, as their only goal is to cash out their earnings every week.

Honestly, if I were you, I would kill your signature campaign, and start a thread where you're looking to find [up to] 10 substantial members of this forum that you're willing to pay. Given that you're spending about 0.4BTC for two weeks, I'd rather take that and offer 0.01BTC per week for a month for up to 10 participants. Full Member and up only.

Mixers are very important to privacy, and with the shutdown of BitMixer, we've been seeing a lot popping up... Given that your UI is so clean, and your userflow is excellent, there's no reason why you shouldn't be one of the top competing mixers in this space. But perception is everything. Everything.

Unfortunately, after seeing that you hired a campaign manager without doing your homework has actually damaged my perception of your company. All of a sudden, it doesn't feel reputable or trustworthy, but rather one that seems like it will do anything to get the word out, even if that means hiring the bad actors in the crypto world that don't have any integrity. You simply cannot associate yourself with these types of members of the crypto world.

Aww, shit, BitWhisk, I had so much hope for you, but actions mean everything here, and I hate to say that you haven't made the right ones so far, other than this thread.

[BitWhisk.io]

Well, guys, we thought that the whole idea of running a campaign is to show users of the forums our signatures. If the users hiring into campaign get their payments, then what is wrong? We are not going to scam anybody here.

Concerning trust parameter. We have checked other managers and while some of them have green trust they have much more red feedback in the untrusted feedback category than lolxxxx. Moreover, lolxxxx has quite good feedback from some established businesses. Right now, as the campaign is open this user is doing his job well, he is on connection with us and we are discussing this whole situation. Quality of the posters is important but our manager doesn't hire everybody who has applied. Aren't these good signs?

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[BitWhisk.io]

Under all above circumstances we have decided to close the current campaign. Definitely, it was our mistake and it won't happen again. I tried to explain my logic in the previous post, but we want to be a part of a community and violation of current rules about trust will not drive us anywhere.

Our excuses to the enrolled users. They should receive payment from our manager soon. I confirm we received the payment for the manager's work back from lolxxxx. Will update this post when everybody will receive their funds.
UPD: I received a payment for campaign back from the user lolxxxx.
UPD2: All the enrolled users approved they obtained a small reward for wearing our signature a couple of days.

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[bill gator]

we thought that the whole idea of running a campaign is to show users of the forums our signatures.

Who do you think will be seeing your signatures buried deep in spam megathreads as the 1000th, 2500th or 4000th+ reply? Even if that was the whole idea of running a campaign, you are not achieving that goal.

If the users hiring into campaign get their payments, then what is wrong? We are not going to scam anybody here.

You have to think beyond the participants of the campaign receiving their funds, especially considering the participants that have been selected thus far do not qualify as a contributing member of the forum by any measure. If you are pleased with paying these participants after acknowledging everything I have laid out, then I can only imagine you are operating with cognitive dissonance and this is unfortunate. What is wrong is the users you are choosing to pay. What is wrong is the message you are sending by defending the posting habits of these users and in fact incentivizing it financially. You may not scam anybody, but your campaign manager has represented companies that have scammed people in the past; this doesn't look good, because it associates you very heavily with their past scams.

We have checked other managers and while some of them have green trust they have much more red feedback in the untrusted feedback category than lolxxxx.

Untrusted feedback rarely has value.
Why do you think Default Trust, and Trusted Feedback are a separate category? They hold more weight and are a good defensive measure against users with multiple alternate accounts, like lolxxxx, that have malicious intent and would abuse the system.

Moreover, lolxxxx has quite good feedback from some established businesses.

Point me to them. I see none.
The only "established" entity I can see affiliated with lolxxxx is the infamous bitconnect scam that made a mockery out of millions and crypto in general.

Right now, as the campaign is open this user is doing his job well

So, then to answer my question; No, you do no see anything that I have pointed out as a significant enough problem to warrant a solution. You honestly believe your campaign manager is doing their job well, even after seeing the participants they have selected. After seeing the hypocritical rules/criteria. I am baffled and was hoping to hear a different response from you.

our manager doesn't hire everybody who has applied. Aren't these good signs?

Your manager also did not "hire" anybody that is a quality member or respected. Your manager did not even the hire the best applicants. Your manager has been found in possession of multiple high ranking alternate accounts; I would honestly be suspicious that they are alt accounts or friends of theirs. I would not necessarily say that these are good signs in collaboration with the rest of what we are seeing.

All in all, this was a very disappointing response about the entire situation. Your participants and campaign manager are single handedly going to take down your business' reputation.


Edit : Seems like you've realized how disastrous this would become, quickly. Good thinking to close the campaign, at least until things are better sorted.

[BitWhisk.io]

Dear Bill, thank you very much for your detailed feedback. We will take your every word into account. I admit this was completely our mistake. Good thing is that we didn't hire a lot of users yet. We will develop a new campaign in a couple of days. Maybe we will hire another trusted manager or will run it by ourselves. Once again, thanks for such a quick reaction.

Best regards,
BitWhisk.io

[bill gator]

Thank you for being so responsive every step of the way. I'm not trying to bully you into doing anything you are not interested in doing and it's not as though I was planning a witch hunt had you not shut down the campaign. I have just been around long enough to see how things play out and as human beings we are well equipped to recognize patterns when they arise. This was one of those unfortunate patterns until just now, as most companies would have ridden that wave stubbornly until the end of their days. You have broken the pattern and now you control the fate of your company again, not these uninterested leeches that hang around the forums. Kudos to you.

Please, feel free to inquire further. If you have any questions you can feel free to PM me or ask openly within this thread. I want to see you succeed as I have stated many times. If you are in need of a quality signature manager then let me know and I will point you in the direction of experienced and reputable. A lot of these trusted campaign mangers have racked up a large amount of untrusted negative feedback by doing exactly as I am suggesting and making enemies by discriminating low-quality users from their campaign.

You've made many adjustments since you've announced your service and this can just be considered a logistical hiccup that is put behind us. Continue to learn from the mistakes, continue to take criticism with dignity and continue to be willing to learn in the way you have been; This project will come together before long.

[BTCforJoe]

Hey BitWhisk, I don’t know why I didn’t think about this before, but bill gator would actually make a great campaign manager... given that he is wearing a signature of one of your competitors lol. But he is extremely thorough and I have no doubt that he would be able to provide you with some quality management and even better reviews of participants.

Lol, sorry bill, if you don’t have the time or desire, but hey... I’m calling it like I see it!

BitWhisk, I’ve readded your site to my bookmarks; I have no issues with tumbling small amounts of coins until you can gain some reputation here. Again, kudos for handling this in a swift manner.

[Investigator]

Thank you for being so responsive every step of the way. I'm not trying to bully you into doing anything you are not interested in doing and it's not as though I was planning a witch hunt had you not shut down the campaign. I have just been around long enough to see how things play out and as human beings we are well equipped to recognize patterns when they arise. This was one of those unfortunate patterns until just now, as most companies would have ridden that wave stubbornly until the end of their days. You have broken the pattern and now you control the fate of your company again, not these uninterested leeches that hang around the forums. Kudos to you.

Please, feel free to inquire further. If you have any questions you can feel free to PM me or ask openly within this thread. I want to see you succeed as I have stated many times. If you are in need of a quality signature manager then let me know and I will point you in the direction of experienced and reputable. A lot of these trusted campaign mangers have racked up a large amount of untrusted negative feedback by doing exactly as I am suggesting and making enemies by discriminating low-quality users from their campaign.

You've made many adjustments since you've announced your service and this can just be considered a logistical hiccup that is put behind us. Continue to learn from the mistakes, continue to take criticism with dignity and continue to be willing to learn in the way you have been; This project will come together before long.

Hey BitWhisk, I don’t know why I didn’t think about this before, but bill gator would actually make a great campaign manager... given that he is wearing a signature of one of your competitors lol. But he is extremely thorough and I have no doubt that he would be able to provide you with some quality management and even better reviews of participants.

Lol, sorry bill, if you don’t have the time or desire, but hey... I’m calling it like I see it!

BitWhisk, I’ve readded your site to my bookmarks; I have no issues with tumbling small amounts of coins until you can gain some reputation here. Again, kudos for handling this in a swift manner.

Both are from the same company. Both are saying the same thing. Both are alts of each other. favoring each other. Stay away from these scammers.

Hire yahoo62278, lauda or lutpin

[bill gator]

I find it very amusing that BTCForJoe has been accused of being my alt, or is it that I am Joe's alt? That's pretty funny, and I would have to assume that you are UME/lolxxxx or whatever else you'd like to call yourself. I do not have a personal problem with you or anybody else, I just was simply trying to protect this new company from falling victim to a known scammer.

yahoo, lauda, lutpin, darkstar, hilariousandco are all pretty solid managers that normally have no problem taking on a new campaign.