Disclose the identity owners of exchanges BTC-e.com

[De Anonimus]

Google translate ((

I propose to announce a competition for the disclosure of ownership BTC-e.com, in my opinion is on this exchange should pay close attention because of the non-public owners and even some objective reasons

 

There are a few scenarios :

 

1. Announce a contest to reward party . Form the prize fund ( respectively).

2 . Owners exchanges themselves disclose personal information (within reason ) .

 

 

The prize fund will be formed either in the form of donations or not formed at all (maybe participants waive fees

 

So , vote and voices the thoughts ...

[MA5H3D]

Why?

[Tomatocage]

Wasn't this already done two years ago? I'm pretty sure the thread is still up somewhere, but the search feature on SMF kind of blows.

[keithers]

I don't see any problem with the owners remaining anonymous as long as withdrawals continue to work smoothly.

[AmericanBit]

I don't see any problem with the owners remaining anonymous as long as withdrawals continue to work smoothly.

Well of course withdraws will work smoothly until they shut down and take off with your money. Im all for this...everyone has a right to know who is in control of their money. If you dont want your identity known, obviously youre up to some shady shit. Cryptsy has Big Vern. He will be at the Miami Conference I think, so hes out there and cleaning up.

[kireinaha]

I don't see any problem with the owners remaining anonymous as long as withdrawals continue to work smoothly.

Well of course withdraws will work smoothly until they shut down and take off with your money. Im all for this...everyone has a right to know who is in control of their money. If you dont want your identity known, obviously youre up to some shady shit. Cryptsy has Big Vern. He will be at the Miami Conference I think, so hes out there and cleaning up.

Even though the owners of BTC-e remain anonymous, their exchange actually works (relative to the other exchanges). Their customer service can be slow, but they tend to get matters resolved for their users. "Big Vern" on the other hand, makes himself visible to the public but his exchange is a piece of shit, funds randomly disappear, and customer service is virtually non-existent. I'd still feel much safer keeping money with BTC-e than Cryptsy... which is sad, but ... welcome to the world of bitcoin.

[Trance]

Google translate ((

I propose to announce a competition for the disclosure of ownership BTC-e.com, in my opinion is on this exchange should pay close attention because of the non-public owners and even some objective reasons

 

There are a few scenarios :

 

1. Announce a contest to reward party . Form the prize fund ( respectively).

2 . Owners exchanges themselves disclose personal information (within reason ) .

 

 

The prize fund will be formed either in the form of donations or not formed at all (maybe participants waive fees

 

So , vote and voices the thoughts ...

were you a victim of a "selective scam"?

[Justin00]

a while back they got hacked into (for real though.... not like the normal "hacks" that occur) and they paid people back from their own $$ if i recall correctly. their the only decent exchange.. but ya i've never had to try out the support luckily.

[MPOE-PR]

Well of course withdraws will work smoothly until they shut down and take off with your money. Im all for this...everyone has a right to know who is in control of their money. If you dont want your identity known, obviously youre up to some shady shit.

So insist on seeing credentials before using a service or otherwise sending BTC. This approach whereby anyone with a tempting enough promise can be trusted up until things get uncomfortable at which point pitchforks is as ineffective as it is insensible.

[AmericanBit]

Well of course withdraws will work smoothly until they shut down and take off with your money. Im all for this...everyone has a right to know who is in control of their money. If you dont want your identity known, obviously youre up to some shady shit.

So insist on seeing credentials before using a service or otherwise sending BTC. This approach whereby anyone with a tempting enough promise can be trusted up until things get uncomfortable at which point pitchforks is as ineffective as it is insensible.

Have an office, be public, speak, and help the community...these Fers make enough money to be totally legit.

[SaltySpitoon]

I'm against finding the identity of the BTC-E owners. They don't ask for my info, I don't want their info as long as they don't run off with my money. They have earned my trust with years of excellent service, and they are currently the only exchange that I deal with. I'd say more than likely they don't want their ID's revealed for legal reasons, and I can respect that.

As far as I can tell, they have figured out that they stand to make far more money in the long run by operating legitimately, as one of the few exchanges that can't be shut down at the whim of the U.S Government. I say leave them alone until there is reason to find their information.

My largest complaint is that sometimes there are miscommunications due to the language barrier, but I've seen them act incredibly ethically, even when they didn't have to. Not to mention back when you could make faces in the chat box, they gave me a secret custom gif for my birth day   I had people offering me tens of Bitcoins to tell them to type :blacat: But I wouldn't do it! *kicks self in the butt*

[ArticMine]

I used BTC-E to trade NMC (that I get from mining) for BTC for over a year now. Never had any problems. I believe they are based in Moscow, Russia from old whois data and also their server is on Moscow time. If there is a government that could pose a threat to BTC-E I suspect it would be that of Russia. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-24/bitcoin-gains-support-from-sberbank-s-gref-as-russia-plans-curbs.html

Edit: I have not figured out how to get USD into BTC-E from Canada. At times I would have found this useful when the polar bears migrate from Canada (Virtex) to Russia (BTC-E)

[tvbcof]

Anyone who puts any money that they cannot walk away from (with a laugh) under control of someone they cannot ID and go after is a total dumb fuck in my opinion.  Bitcoin's short history is replete with examples of why.

That's part of the reason I don't have a BTC-E or Bitstamp account.  I value my document scans at about $10k so right there is plenty reason to avoid these two operators even if I could limit my losses by holding few funds with them.

---

Everyone who provides any 'financial services' to the Bitcoin community should be pre-doxed IMHO.  I wish someone would set up a service to do this.  Most legitimate and responsible shops will dox themselves, but it would be of value to have someone proficient verify anyway.

[AmericanBit]

Anyone who puts any money that they cannot walk away from (with a laugh) under control of someone they cannot ID and go after is a total dumb fuck in my opinion.  Bitcoin's short history is replete with examples of why.

That's part of the reason I don't have a BTC-E or Bitstamp account.  I value my document scans at about $10k so right there is plenty reason to avoid these two operators even if I could limit my losses by holding few funds with them.

---

Everyone who provides any 'financial services' to the Bitcoin community should be pre-doxed IMHO.  I wish someone would set up a service to do this.  Most legitimate and responsible shops will dox themselves, but it would be of value to have someone proficient verify anyway.

+1

[SaltySpitoon]

Anyone who puts any money that they cannot walk away from (with a laugh) under control of someone they cannot ID and go after is a total dumb fuck in my opinion.  Bitcoin's short history is replete with examples of why.

That's part of the reason I don't have a BTC-E or Bitstamp account.  I value my document scans at about $10k so right there is plenty reason to avoid these two operators even if I could limit my losses by holding few funds with them.

---

Everyone who provides any 'financial services' to the Bitcoin community should be pre-doxed IMHO.  I wish someone would set up a service to do this.  Most legitimate and responsible shops will dox themselves, but it would be of value to have someone proficient verify anyway.

I agree on some points but disagree on the others. I lost 14 Bitcoins to MTGox back when they started needing user's ID to comply with U.S AML regulations. I'm not legally allowed to submit my ID to uncleared businesses/locations, so my money just sat until my account's deletion. I value my Identity very highly, not because I plan to scam, but because I value my privacy, and do not want to be bothered unless I do something that merits being bothered. I believe BTC-E is entitled to the same rights. They are actually an illegal exchange in the eyes of the United States, as they don't collect user's information, and don't obey U.S AML Regulation. By giving out their ID, they would compromise the safety of their exchange from attempted seizure. I think the number one selling factor for BTC-E is that while anonymous and in Russia, they don't have to fear shut down by the U.S, who has not been kind to Bitcoin exchanges and services. Mt.Gox is open with their identies, and are a legal business entity, but they have had millions siezed from them by the U.S Gov, so I don't find Mt.Gox for example to be safer to use than BTC-E, on the contrary, I exclusively use BTC-E because of their history of good business practice and honesty and their privacy policy. BTC-E doesn't require anything identifying of you, I think now they require an email account for withdrawl verification, but no other information is gathered from you.

Back in 2012 BTC-E was hacked when someone managed to inject fake Liberty Reserve USD into the exchange, where the attackers bought and withdrew up over $10,000 worth of Bitcoins with fake USD. BTC-E fixed the situation and refunded everyone out of their own pockets, which at the time of $5 BTC was a whole lot of money. After that, they registered in my book as the most professional exchange out there, as exchanges that have been hacked don't have the best track record. They refunded months of exchange fees and work in order to keep their customers, and I think it did wonders for their business.

Satoshi earned our trust anonymously, there are a lot of people here who we trust without knowing who they are, and of course that trust has to be earned. Sometimes it ends up biting us, and I can't say for sure that BTC-E wont scam everyone down the road, but I trust BTC-E far more than any other exchange because the owners and developers have shown their trustworthy qualities through their actions. There are plenty of public figures that were not trustworthy. We all knew where Trendon Shavers (Pirateat40) lived, many Bitcoiners had met him personally, had his contact info, etc, and that didn't keep him from scamming everyone. So I don't see why not leave BTC-E anonymous until they have given us a reason to hunt them down.

Thats my personal opinion anyway, if they haven't earned your trust, don't use them.

[ArticMine]

Anyone who puts any money that they cannot walk away from (with a laugh) under control of someone they cannot ID and go after is a total dumb fuck in my opinion.  Bitcoin's short history is replete with examples of why.

That's part of the reason I don't have a BTC-E or Bitstamp account.  I value my document scans at about $10k so right there is plenty reason to avoid these two operators even if I could limit my losses by holding few funds with them.

---

Everyone who provides any 'financial services' to the Bitcoin community should be pre-doxed IMHO.  I wish someone would set up a service to do this.  Most legitimate and responsible shops will dox themselves, but it would be of value to have someone proficient verify anyway.

While in principle this is very good advice in practice it is not. It comes down to making an informed decision between risk and reward. I started buying and trading BTC in the fall of 2011, and factored in the exchange counter party risk as a significant part of my risk vs return calculation when purchasing BTC. BTC has provided me with phenomenal returns over that last 2 years however it is also fair to say that those returns did not come without significant risk. Yes there will be a time when "everyone who provides any 'financial services' to the Bitcoin community will be pre-doxed", but the BTC / USD would also likely be 10,000 USD or even 100,000 USD to a BTC, rather than 5 USD or less to a BTC when I started buying, to reflect the lower risk. Furthermore those who bought BTC in 2010 from "some guy on the Internet" or in exchange for some pizza took a even greater risk than I did and had even greater returns.

Edit: My last NMC / BTC trade at BTC-E was at 0.01251 BTC per NMC. Today NMC  / BTC is trading at 0.00646. So yes I took a risk in trusting my NMC to BTC-E but I also got the reward for that risk.

[tvbcof]

Salty and Arctic,

I consider the rational of either highly valuing one's privacy or using the best of less than perfect choices to be valid.  I've made similar choices myself from time to time.

When I've made such choices, I've always considered my potential loss and assumed some (often high) probability that I would suffer it.  If you do the same, I don't consider you to be 'dumb fucks'.  At least not for that reason   And anyway, who cares what I think?

I do think it is highly likely that a shady exchange operator would be perfectly honest and professional as long as they are making big bucks doing so so I don't think that a lack of troubles so far is a terribly strong indication of future performance.  An operator who remains anonymous retains the option to disappear at a time of their strategic choosing.  Who can say if BTC-E would be prone to this?  I don't know one way or another.