Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 08:47:42 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: TradeHill - Why we no longer accept Dwolla and an open letter to Ben Milne  (Read 35792 times)
CubedRoot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 295


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:02:54 PM
 #241

Now, after your announcement that you will no longer use Dwolla for withdrawals, I am forced to stop using Tradehill as my exchange.  I will have to move back to Mt. Gox. I absolutely refuse to use Paxum as a service due to their intrusive background information requirements.
Is there a reason why you chose to stop using Dwolla for account withdrawals?  Its impossible for the end user (like me) to fraud Tradehill out of money when I am simply making a withdrawal. Plus, Dwolla is still ALOT cheaper to withdraw funds, its $.25 compared to Paxums $1.00.

I'm with CubedRoot on this one.  I have USD stuck on TradeHill that I'll have to to trade back to BTC just to get it out and resell on MtGox, paying commissions again to both.  I understand preventing inbound transfers, but by getting rid of outbound you screwed quite a few of us.
SteveFL,
Keep in mind also, that now, to get your USD from Tradehill all the way back to your bank it will now cost you $6.00!!!!!  Using Dwolla this same set of transfers would have only cost you $.50. 
I think its rather frustrating that Tradehill wont simply keep using Dwolla for Withdrawals since there is absolutley 0 risk in them getting frauded on withdrawals.
1480927662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480927662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480927662
Reply with quote  #2

1480927662
Report to moderator
1480927662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480927662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480927662
Reply with quote  #2

1480927662
Report to moderator
1480927662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480927662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480927662
Reply with quote  #2

1480927662
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480927662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480927662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480927662
Reply with quote  #2

1480927662
Report to moderator
1480927662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480927662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480927662
Reply with quote  #2

1480927662
Report to moderator
1480927662
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480927662

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480927662
Reply with quote  #2

1480927662
Report to moderator
Bitcoin Swami
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:13:25 PM
 #242

Now, after your announcement that you will no longer use Dwolla for withdrawals, I am forced to stop using Tradehill as my exchange.  I will have to move back to Mt. Gox. I absolutely refuse to use Paxum as a service due to their intrusive background information requirements.
Is there a reason why you chose to stop using Dwolla for account withdrawals?  Its impossible for the end user (like me) to fraud Tradehill out of money when I am simply making a withdrawal. Plus, Dwolla is still ALOT cheaper to withdraw funds, its $.25 compared to Paxums $1.00.

I'm with CubedRoot on this one.  I have USD stuck on TradeHill that I'll have to to trade back to BTC just to get it out and resell on MtGox, paying commissions again to both.  I understand preventing inbound transfers, but by getting rid of outbound you screwed quite a few of us.
SteveFL,
Keep in mind also, that now, to get your USD from Tradehill all the way back to your bank it will now cost you $6.00!!!!!  Using Dwolla this same set of transfers would have only cost you $.50. 
I think its rather frustrating that Tradehill wont simply keep using Dwolla for Withdrawals since there is absolutley 0 risk in them getting frauded on withdrawals.

Wouldn't that mean tradehill would still need to keep an account with them with money in it?  What if Dwolla would decide to reverse more transactions and take more money from tradehill? I'm not sure how it works just asking a question.
CubedRoot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 295


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:30:19 PM
 #243

Now, after your announcement that you will no longer use Dwolla for withdrawals, I am forced to stop using Tradehill as my exchange.  I will have to move back to Mt. Gox. I absolutely refuse to use Paxum as a service due to their intrusive background information requirements.
Is there a reason why you chose to stop using Dwolla for account withdrawals?  Its impossible for the end user (like me) to fraud Tradehill out of money when I am simply making a withdrawal. Plus, Dwolla is still ALOT cheaper to withdraw funds, its $.25 compared to Paxums $1.00.

I'm with CubedRoot on this one.  I have USD stuck on TradeHill that I'll have to to trade back to BTC just to get it out and resell on MtGox, paying commissions again to both.  I understand preventing inbound transfers, but by getting rid of outbound you screwed quite a few of us.
SteveFL,
Keep in mind also, that now, to get your USD from Tradehill all the way back to your bank it will now cost you $6.00!!!!!  Using Dwolla this same set of transfers would have only cost you $.50. 
I think its rather frustrating that Tradehill wont simply keep using Dwolla for Withdrawals since there is absolutley 0 risk in them getting frauded on withdrawals.

Wouldn't that mean tradehill would still need to keep an account with them with money in it?  What if Dwolla would decide to reverse more transactions and take more money from tradehill? I'm not sure how it works just asking a question.
Sure they would need to keep an account open, but if that account is only used to send money to end users there is no chance of fraud. The fraud they faced was were an end user would send money from Dwolla to Tradehill, buy BTC, then file a dispute with Dwolla.  Dwolla wouldn then refund the money to the end user, and debit it from Tradehill.
With the way I suggested, Tradehill would only use Dwolla to send money to its end users. This eliminates the risk of an end user doing what I described above since its not an option for funding your Tradehill account via Dwolla. It is impossible for an end user to fraud tradehill by getting money sent to them by Tradehill. 
makomk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:32:05 PM
 #244

Now suppose Mallory manages to get her hand on Alice's cash (either by stealing her purse or breaking into her house by installing malicious software on Alice's house alarm system) and sends Alice's cash to a big company called ABCDEFG, then exchanges it for illegal currency (for it's easily-laundered) called bitcoins. What a tragedy... This is why the next phase of fiat money fiasco will be a transformation to coupons with owner's birth certificate serial numbers engraved. This will (eventually) solve the money laundering problem.
Alternatively, Alice could only keep a small, safe amount of money in cash at once and store the rest of her money in an organisation that's capable of securing it more effectively and lets her withdraw it as she needs it. We might call this hypothetical organisation a "bank".

Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS
Bitcoin Swami
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:34:47 PM
 #245

Now, after your announcement that you will no longer use Dwolla for withdrawals, I am forced to stop using Tradehill as my exchange.  I will have to move back to Mt. Gox. I absolutely refuse to use Paxum as a service due to their intrusive background information requirements.
Is there a reason why you chose to stop using Dwolla for account withdrawals?  Its impossible for the end user (like me) to fraud Tradehill out of money when I am simply making a withdrawal. Plus, Dwolla is still ALOT cheaper to withdraw funds, its $.25 compared to Paxums $1.00.

I'm with CubedRoot on this one.  I have USD stuck on TradeHill that I'll have to to trade back to BTC just to get it out and resell on MtGox, paying commissions again to both.  I understand preventing inbound transfers, but by getting rid of outbound you screwed quite a few of us.
SteveFL,
Keep in mind also, that now, to get your USD from Tradehill all the way back to your bank it will now cost you $6.00!!!!!  Using Dwolla this same set of transfers would have only cost you $.50. 
I think its rather frustrating that Tradehill wont simply keep using Dwolla for Withdrawals since there is absolutley 0 risk in them getting frauded on withdrawals.

Wouldn't that mean tradehill would still need to keep an account with them with money in it?  What if Dwolla would decide to reverse more transactions and take more money from tradehill? I'm not sure how it works just asking a question.
Sure they would need to keep an account open, but if that account is only used to send money to end users there is no chance of fraud. The fraud they faced was were an end user would send money from Dwolla to Tradehill, buy BTC, then file a dispute with Dwolla.  Dwolla wouldn then refund the money to the end user, and debit it from Tradehill.
With the way I suggested, Tradehill would only use Dwolla to send money to its end users. This eliminates the risk of an end user doing what I described above since its not an option for funding your Tradehill account via Dwolla. It is impossible for an end user to fraud tradehill by getting money sent to them by Tradehill. 

Well if I was tradehill I wouldn't keep one cent in Dwolla. 
SteveFL
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 33


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:46:49 PM
 #246

Well if I was tradehill I wouldn't keep one cent in Dwolla. 

Honestly, I don't blame them.  But without Dwolla or a change in their ACH Fees, I won't keep one cent or one BTC on TradeHill.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 07:48:23 PM
 #247

Wouldn't that mean tradehill would still need to keep an account with them with money in it?  What if Dwolla would decide to reverse more transactions and take more money from tradehill? I'm not sure how it works just asking a question.

It does sound like Dwolla can suck whatever money out of Tradehills account they like and use it in any way they see fit, so it is hard to fault Tradehill for having trouble transferring funds through Dwolla.  One suspects that Dwolla has edited their books enough by now that Tradehill has a negative balance and if they tried to put money in to cash someone out, it would not work anyway.

Tradehill seems to have clammed up so I suppose they are finally in talks and we'll all have to just throw conjectures around for the fun of it.

For my part I have drawn my Tradehill account down just in case they 'see the light' vis-a-vis the 'proper' way to do business these days.  Namely, that the business partners remain solvent, the investors stay whole, and the end users take it in the hind end.  But I do retain some exposure on the strength of my success with Tradehill so far and Jered's communications on this forum.  As alway, no more than I can afford to lose and chuckle in the process of doing so.  Mostly it's way low bets in the case of a liquidity event which seems possible to me in this stage of Bitcoin's evolution.

fcmatt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 08:56:33 PM
 #248

Well i had some time to look over paxum and the verdict is not good.

It increases the costs dramatically compared to dwolla. I am also a miner. If i want BTC.. i mine them.
I do not load funds to an exchange. It is USD I want right now and the goal is to keep costs down.

Time to create a mtgox account. Thankfully BTC dropped in price due to what I think is the dwolla incident
so therefore getting my money out of TH will result in a small profit most likely.

Plus.. paxum's website gives me the willies. It just does not feel right to me. Reminds me of spam email links
to websites selling viagra.

c'est la vie
JoelKatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.


View Profile WWW
July 30, 2011, 09:40:22 PM
 #249

With the way I suggested, Tradehill would only use Dwolla to send money to its end users. This eliminates the risk of an end user doing what I described above since its not an option for funding your Tradehill account via Dwolla. It is impossible for an end user to fraud tradehill by getting money sent to them by Tradehill.
That can't happen until all the issues between TradeHill and Dwolla are resolved and Dwolla agrees to cover all losses from transactions before now.

Otherwise, TradeHill could send your $1,000 to Dwolla, go to send that money to you only to have Dwolla say, "Sorry, TradeHill, you can't send money to CubedRoot because you have a negative balance." Tradehill responses, "What? We had a zero balance and then sent in $1,000." Dwolla replies, "Yeah, you had a zero balance, but then two transactions from two months ago were reversed. You now have a negative $1,500 balance.".

I am an employee of Ripple.
1Joe1Katzci1rFcsr9HH7SLuHVnDy2aihZ BM-NBM3FRExVJSJJamV9ccgyWvQfratUHgN
Bitcoin Swami
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 09:58:30 PM
 #250

With the way I suggested, Tradehill would only use Dwolla to send money to its end users. This eliminates the risk of an end user doing what I described above since its not an option for funding your Tradehill account via Dwolla. It is impossible for an end user to fraud tradehill by getting money sent to them by Tradehill.
That can't happen until all the issues between TradeHill and Dwolla are resolved and Dwolla agrees to cover all losses from transactions before now.

Otherwise, TradeHill could send your $1,000 to Dwolla, go to send that money to you only to have Dwolla say, "Sorry, TradeHill, you can't send money to CubedRoot because you have a negative balance." Tradehill responses, "What? We had a zero balance and then sent in $1,000." Dwolla replies, "Yeah, you had a zero balance, but then two transactions from two months ago were reversed. You now have a negative $1,500 balance.".

Exactly my thoughts.
DrKennethNoisewater
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 125



View Profile
July 30, 2011, 10:36:33 PM
 #251

Well i had some time to look over paxum and the verdict is not good.

It increases the costs dramatically compared to dwolla. I am also a miner. If i want BTC.. i mine them.
I do not load funds to an exchange. It is USD I want right now and the goal is to keep costs down.

Time to create a mtgox account. Thankfully BTC dropped in price due to what I think is the dwolla incident
so therefore getting my money out of TH will result in a small profit most likely.

Plus.. paxum's website gives me the willies. It just does not feel right to me. Reminds me of spam email links
to websites selling viagra.

c'est la vie

Yup, looks like I'll be transferring my coin from TradeHill to Gox as well.

Trader Steve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 725


"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."


View Profile
July 30, 2011, 10:44:47 PM
 #252

Quote

Promote locally, sell locally.  What do you suggest tradehill do? They are trying their best.

Yes, develop your local network of trading partners so you can lessen your reliance on the exchanges which will likely be brought under "know your customer" regulations sooner rather than later.

DrKennethNoisewater
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 125



View Profile
July 30, 2011, 10:48:03 PM
 #253

All of this is completely avoidable.

Chalk it up to inexperience and poor management.

JoelKatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.


View Profile WWW
July 30, 2011, 11:52:08 PM
 #254

Exactly my thoughts.
Yeah. If I had noticed that you had already said exactly the same thing, I wouldn't have posted it.

As soon as the current issues between TradeHill and Dwolla are resolved, assuming Dwolla is willing to resolve them, TradeHill could resume using Dwolla for outbound transfers. But that would require Dwolla to reimburse TradeHill for all prior reversed transactions.

I am an employee of Ripple.
1Joe1Katzci1rFcsr9HH7SLuHVnDy2aihZ BM-NBM3FRExVJSJJamV9ccgyWvQfratUHgN
DrKennethNoisewater
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 125



View Profile
July 31, 2011, 12:33:02 AM
 #255

Exactly my thoughts.
Yeah. If I had noticed that you had already said exactly the same thing, I wouldn't have posted it.

As soon as the current issues between TradeHill and Dwolla are resolved, assuming Dwolla is willing to resolve them, TradeHill could resume using Dwolla for outbound transfers. But that would require Dwolla to reimburse TradeHill for all prior reversed transactions.

Yeah, what he said ;>
becoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428



View Profile
July 31, 2011, 06:59:40 AM
 #256

Now suppose Mallory manages to get her hand on Alice's cash (either by stealing her purse or breaking into her house by installing malicious software on Alice's house alarm system) and sends Alice's cash to a big company called ABCDEFG, then exchanges it for illegal currency (for it's easily-laundered) called bitcoins. What a tragedy... This is why the next phase of fiat money fiasco will be a transformation to coupons with owner's birth certificate serial numbers engraved. This will (eventually) solve the money laundering problem.
Alternatively, Alice could only keep a small, safe amount of money in cash at once and store the rest of her money in an organisation that's capable of securing it more effectively and lets her withdraw it as she needs it. We might call this hypothetical organisation a "bank".
Alice is not storing her cash in this organization called 'bank'. She is giving her cash in exchange of bank's promise to give her same amount of cash if she needs it! As history shows during last 40 years, the organization called 'bank' will spend Alice's cash speculating on different markets. For this is the only way such organization can pay their way. When time comes to keep the promise they gave to Alice, this organization would simply bribe the government to print some more promises called 'banknotes'. This is the only way this hypothetical organization can keep their promises!

Fortunately, time is coming when only low life illiterates will use banks. The rest of people will learn to do banking without banks from their home computers or mobiles. They will only keep small, safe amount of cash at once (called wallet. dat) and the rest of their money in a separate wallet.dat file copies that is more effectively secured than any bank can do. We might call this hypothetical personal "bank" without paying any banking fees or taxes.

18sNtvUmtW6nrQXfYt1wvviGockSWxhPBX
nefanon
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112



View Profile
August 23, 2011, 03:25:04 PM
 #257

Any updates on the Tradehill/Dwolla situation? I'd like to try TradeHill but I have no interest in using Paxum.
Jered Kenna (TradeHill)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile WWW
August 23, 2011, 03:56:45 PM
 #258

Any updates on the Tradehill/Dwolla situation? I'd like to try TradeHill but I have no interest in using Paxum.

We will be making  a few  announcements about funding methods in a few hours that will allow you to easily deposit funds.
Stay tuned.

Jered

moneyandtech.com
@moneyandtech @jeredkenna
nefanon
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112



View Profile
August 23, 2011, 07:30:12 PM
 #259

Any updates on the Tradehill/Dwolla situation? I'd like to try TradeHill but I have no interest in using Paxum.

We will be making  a few  announcements about funding methods in a few hours that will allow you to easily deposit funds.
Stay tuned.

Jered

!!! Awesome =D
Yankee (BitInstant)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


Charlie 'Van Bitcoin' Shrem


View Profile WWW
August 23, 2011, 07:36:47 PM
 #260

Any updates on the Tradehill/Dwolla situation? I'd like to try TradeHill but I have no interest in using Paxum.

We will be making  a few  announcements about funding methods in a few hours that will allow you to easily deposit funds.
Stay tuned.

Jered

!!! Awesome =D

You can now fund your TradeHill accounts using Dwolla, LR and MtGox codes https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38914.0

Bitcoin pioneer. An apostle of Satoshi Nakamoto. A crusader for a new, better, tech-driven society. A dreamer.

More about me: http://CharlieShrem.com
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!