Green trusted user vouching for shady site

[GeorgeJohn]

From my point of view campaign manager has made himself very clear that it's not part of the campaign just managing the signature campaign for them. I believed that it have no hand concerning the company way of management and it's not part of their team. I think no one should blame and question him for any reason.

[1715345095]

1715345095

[1715345095]

1715345095

[1715345095]

1715345095

[1715345095]

1715345095

[1715345095]

1715345095

[eddie13]

What goes on now is that mixer tries to start working and some of the for sure weird participants of the forum don't want it to work because they think it's not worth to be trusted, without reasons, just simple judgement. I consider that absolutely abnormal, you may say that any mixer is not trusted because you only think it's not trusted

Signature campaign is more about marketing, yes we want to become trusted mixer and we make company to look trustworthy, that's normal. We ordered company for 1 month for now

You should have came into this with a completely different attitude and a lot more research..
Huge fail scam or not..

“I drive a $150k car” lmao..
The way you have conducted yourself leaves almost no reason to possibly side with you even for devils advocate..

Your signature campaign manager should have mentored you on how to start such an operation, and advertise it, in a way that would be successful..

Including NOT sounding scammy..
Unless your campaign manager gave you advice and you refused it, but he ran the campaign your way anyway..
Probably not a great campaign manager if he ran something that he thought sounded scammy..
And decent manager should have had a conversation about this with you..

You should have don’t your research here about how to do this SUCCESSFULLY..
Not just how to run a signature campaign, but also how to not get chased out and labeled a scam..

You could have taken many steps here to not get labeled a scam, if your legit..


Experienced users here should also help you understand what you are doing wrong and help you correct it, unless they really feel like you are a scam..


I think it’s probably a scam.. Could be not a scam..
You should be content to operate at a very low volume for a long time to build trust the right way.. (become profitable)..
You aren’t going to start a new mixer and it just explode, and start out by making huge claims..
A mixer gains trust by standing the rest of time, and looking profitable instead of looking like a scam..



I think CM is a honeypot.. Not necessarily a scam, maybe..
Chances 40% legit, 50% honeypot, 10% will scam..

Wonder what the profitability of CM looks like..
Hmmm..


Bunch of CM signatures bashing on another mixer also looks like crap..
I get it but, damn.. Bad optics..
I don’t feel their is anything bad to it but the optics though..

[Poker Player]

OMG it looks like a kindergarten's discussion here...

Especially because someone seems like 15.

Perhaps not the right way to do it but I understand how @Shaker_finance replies to people. If you create an unfriendly environnement, don't complain if you read unfriendly replies

I don't. This is how he should have replied:

 SCAM EXCHANGE MONITOR: BestChange

Shaker answered in a bad way simply because he was asked questions, without being accused of scamming.

As for the use of "trusted" and other, well I would say marketing. By the way I didn't see somone here complaining for all others services (no matter the type) that used "trusted' in their titles/text or whatever

The problem is that if you use "trusted and safe" and acknowledge that you are not trusted, which is just marketing, you make people think that you are not safe either. This coupled with the answers of a 15 year old kid from someone who promotes a money business, where you have to send him money, not someone who sells lettuce, makes me not trust him even for $0.01 transactions. I'd rather give it to a beggar.

Someone who has a business has to deal with complaints and handle them well, but when it comes to a money business like mixing, the answers have to be exquisite and clear.

[eddie13]

Reminds me of AtobMixer..

However if they enter a wrong address then its donation towards our system and we pay tax and buy a bottles of wine and enjoy with the Russian girls with the money.

So please ensure the address is entered correctly or we are buying wine with the money received as donation towards our system.

I liked that.. Brutal honesty!


If one wanted to start a mixer successfully one should start from a point of absolute honesty, be humble and willing to accept critique, try to understand that they do look risky and why they look risky..

“We are a new mixer, try us out, start small, remember us and check back in a year we will still be here.
We take X% fees because we aren’t doing this for free..
If you screw up and loose your coins in our service and it’s your fault we’re charging you 5% with a 0.01BTC minimum to fix it because we aren’t doing that for free either..
We are doing this in the hopes of becoming a profitable business (plan, examples)
Don’t trust just one mixer to clean your coins, use multiple..
Hide your inputs from CM and hide your outputs from us! Or vice versa..”

Much better!

Not “we have 50 BTC but can’t sign for it and I drive a $150k car (I totally didn’t buy from scamming) and are the most trusted in the internet even though we haven’t processed a single transaction yet”…

[The Sceptical Chymist]

What goes on now is that mixer tries to start working and some of the for sure weird participants of the forum don't want it to work because they think it's not worth to be trusted, without reasons, just simple judgement. I consider that absolutely abnormal, you may say that any mixer is not trusted because you only think it's not trusted

Signature campaign is more about marketing, yes we want to become trusted mixer and we make company to look trustworthy, that's normal. We ordered company for 1 month for now

You should have came into this with a completely different attitude and a lot more research..

Yep, I agree.  The general attitude most bitcoiners have (or should have IMO) is that a service like this should be considered untrustworthy until proven otherwise, especially with the claims Shaker_finance has made and also how he made them.  Insulting critics/skeptics in the scam-filled world of crypto isn't the right way to go about convincing people you're legit.

As far as the claim that people are only posting criticism because they're in a sig campaign is wrong, for one.  Those members could just as easily post idiotic praise instead of thoughtfully picking this mixer apart.  It's also hypocritical if Shaker_finance also has a campaign running to promote his own service (as mentioned by OP; I haven't looked in the Services section). 

I don't know if Shaker_finance is brand new to the forum or not, but it seems like he is, as anyone who's been here would expect to be challenged after making all of those claims.  And to him I say it's nothing personal, because he's obviously taking it that way.  It would be far better to answer the skeptics with data than defensiveness.

[LoyceV]

Firstly I’d like to thank Poker player that has notified me about this thread, LoyceV, you should have do it instead of him, but anyway, no matter about it.

I prefer not to send unsollicited PMs, and my assumption was you could (and should) have known about the red flags by reading their ANN thread.

I’d like to let you everyone know that I’ll close campaign within this evening and will refund funds to the owner.

That seems like a good solution

I don’t want to hurt everyone, and if someone risks to be scammed because of signature
~
I prefer to not work with this kind of business that risks to hurt my reputation built in 10 years.

I can't help but wonder though: do you research what you're promoting before accepting it?

@Shaker_finance
Since you're already responding to "some" of the issues/problems, it'd be nice to see an in-depth explanation as to why do you think signing a message isn't really that safe?

Are they thinking the private key will be exposed?
If so they can move some funds from address a to address b. However signing a message is completely safe.

My guess: they have no money so they can't sign anything and made up a lousy excuse.

I drive car worth around 150k$ lol

It's usually poor people who think other poor people are impressed if they mention large amounts of money. If you want bragging rights here: sign a message.

if you keep the funds for three/four weeks of the campaign, then it is safe there and there is no possibility that the participants will be cheated and not paid, right?

Right. But this isn't only about campaign participants.

also, the red tag which Shaker_finance received is still not based on the fraud that happened. even though he has a sordidness language, this should not mark him as a scammer.

The forum describes negative feedback as "You think that trading with this person is high-risk.".

[Poker Player]

also, the red tag which Shaker_finance received is still not based on the fraud that happened. even though he has a sordidness language, this should not mark him as a scammer.

I answer you, because we both have on our trust lists to each other. I have not tagged him as a scammer, what I have said is that I, personally as a result of the responses seen in this thread (one of them includes boasting about unlimited amounts but not signing a message), would not have any kind of money deal with him nor would I put a single satoshi in his mixer, and that this is open to change depending on future behavior but, as of today, I wouldn't make any deal with him.

The forum describes negative feedback as "You think that trading with this person is high-risk.".

And that's what I think, hence the feedback.

[Shaker_finance]

Reminds me of AtobMixer..

However if they enter a wrong address then its donation towards our system and we pay tax and buy a bottles of wine and enjoy with the Russian girls with the money.

So please ensure the address is entered correctly or we are buying wine with the money received as donation towards our system.

I liked that.. Brutal honesty!


If one wanted to start a mixer successfully one should start from a point of absolute honesty, be humble and willing to accept critique, try to understand that they do look risky and why they look risky..

“We are a new mixer, try us out, start small, remember us and check back in a year we will still be here.
We take X% fees because we aren’t doing this for free..
If you screw up and loose your coins in our service and it’s your fault we’re charging you 5% with a 0.01BTC minimum to fix it because we aren’t doing that for free either..
We are doing this in the hopes of becoming a profitable business (plan, examples)
Don’t trust just one mixer to clean your coins, use multiple..
Hide your inputs from CM and hide your outputs from us! Or vice versa..”

Much better!

Not “we have 50 BTC but can’t sign for it and I drive a $150k car (I totally didn’t buy from scamming) and are the most trusted in the internet even though we haven’t processed a single transaction yet”…

20 BTC was claimed, not from scamming, have other internet business, so your irony is basically - you've shit your pants now

also, the red tag which Shaker_finance received is still not based on the fraud that happened. even though he has a sordidness language, this should not mark him as a scammer.

I answer you, because we both have on our trust lists to each other. I have not tagged him as a scammer, what I have said is that I, personally as a result of the responses seen in this thread (one of them includes boasting about unlimited amounts but not signing a message), would not have any kind of money deal with him nor would I put a single satoshi in his mixer, and that this is open to change depending on future behavior but, as of today, I wouldn't make any deal with him.

The forum describes negative feedback as "You think that trading with this person is high-risk.".

And that's what I think, hence the feedback.

Leaving neutral feedback is solution here, you can write that mixer is new and you don't yet trust it but will see after time

OMG it looks like a kindergarten's discussion here...

On Bitcointalk, mixers are always criticized but never encouraged. Just look at all the latest topics about tumblers and who is posting in them. Some even think that if the domain name is 2 weeks old, it's a scam. They expect the admin to buy the domain name 1 year before creating a site lol. I have even see a person receiving a red tag for something he's not even connected .How crazy is that

This is also a trend in the whole "Service Announcements" section but mixers are more prone to it.
From the start, the problem was the way @Shaker_finance was welcomed. And it's the same reason why some mixers don't want to do a marketing campaign. At best, they make 1-2 posts to annonce their mixer and don't come back, or very rarely for updates.

Perhaps not the right way to do it but I understand how @Shaker_finance replies to people. If you create an unfriendly environnement, don't complain if you read unfriendly replies

As for the use of "trusted" and other, well I would say marketing. By the way I didn't see somone here complaining for all others services (no matter the type) that used "trusted' in their titles/text or whatever

I support that idea that first was unfriendly environment and only then rest of things. Those mixer mad skeptics don't help project at all you should understand it guys
Looks like you are the only person out there who understands me, thanks for that reply

[SFR10]

I don't want further explanations to prevent other conflict.

By dodging a question like that, it implies there wasn't really a valid reason for giving those statements and that complicates things further!

I would say that the decision to close the campaign is probably not completely founded.

If Gianluca95 didn't halt the campaign, sooner or later it would've led to some conversions and that's where it gets tricky.

Are they thinking the private key will be exposed?
If so they can move some funds from address a to address b. However signing a message is completely safe.

My guess: they have no money so they can't sign anything and made up a lousy excuse.

In addition to LoyceV's comment, this is the second time I'm seeing someone making such comments ^{[e.g. signing isn't safe]} in the past month or two ^{[I had no luck in finding the other user]}, so either they're connected or they're misinformed ^{[most likely it's what LoyceV said earlier]}.

[Little Mouse]

20 BTC was claimed, not from scamming

Lie. You claimed you were accepting unlimited amount of BTC mixing which later you changed as 20 BTC. Don't you think this two has a huge difference? This is a lie which once again proves that you are not trustworthy.

Leaving neutral feedback is solution here

What about the retaliationary feedback against dkbit?

[Shaker_finance]

20 BTC was claimed, not from scamming

Lie. You claimed you were accepting unlimited amount of BTC mixing which later you changed as 20 BTC. Don't you think this two has a huge difference? This is a lie which once again proves that you are not trustworthy.

It's you lie, I don't reject that we first have written unlimited amount of BTC because 20 BTC to mix is close to unlimited... I'm not sure people mix more per single mix

20 BTC was claimed, not from scamming

Lie. You claimed you were accepting unlimited amount of BTC mixing which later you changed as 20 BTC. Don't you think this two has a huge difference? This is a lie which once again proves that you are not trustworthy.

Leaving neutral feedback is solution here

What about the retaliationary feedback against dkbit?

What about relationairy feedback about Shaker.finance ?

[eddie13]

have other internet business

Perfect!
What a great way to gain some instant credibility for you new mixer by showing experience operating other similar businesses..

“Owned/operated by the team behind Binance.”
If you were the same company as binance then you would have instant trust and credibility..

Your not binance though, who are you?
What are these other businesses?
Why didn’t you mention them and use them as an example of your skills and success?

If that’s true you could really get a step ahead in gaining trust for the new mixer..
Why not?

[LoyceV]

Perfect!
What a great way to gain some instant credibility for you new mixer by showing experience operating other similar businesses..

Here's an example

[o_e_l_e_o]

It's you lie, I don't reject that we first have written unlimited amount of BTC because 20 BTC to mix is close to unlimited... I'm not sure people mix more per single mix

It sounds like you don't understand the market you are in.

Here's a ChipMixer deposit of 1,000 BTC I am aware of simply because we were discussing it an another thread: https://mempool.space/tx/1e7c498469369e90dfdd0c8258c6aa5325661553f441a2c6897d93b210f8ef67. There are plenty more such examples.

Further, a balance of 20 BTC does not let you mix anywhere close to 20 BTC. Since we know now that you supposedly have a balance of 20 BTC, if someone were to deposit say 5 BTC to your mixer, then there is a significant chance that their withdrawal would be easily linked to their deposit due simply to matching the size of the inputs and outputs. I would not even be comfortable mixing 1 BTC on a mixer with only 20 BTC being mixed, which is hardly "unlimited".

[Shaker_finance]

It's you lie, I don't reject that we first have written unlimited amount of BTC because 20 BTC to mix is close to unlimited... I'm not sure people mix more per single mix

It sounds like you don't understand the market you are in.

Here's a ChipMixer deposit of 1,000 BTC I am aware of simply because we were discussing it an another thread: https://mempool.space/tx/1e7c498469369e90dfdd0c8258c6aa5325661553f441a2c6897d93b210f8ef67. There are plenty more such examples.

Further, a balance of 20 BTC does not let you mix anywhere close to 20 BTC. Since we know now that you supposedly have a balance of 20 BTC, if someone were to deposit say 5 BTC to your mixer, then there is a significant chance that their withdrawal would be easily linked to their deposit due simply to matching the size of the inputs and outputs. I would not even be comfortable mixing 1 BTC on a mixer with only 20 BTC being mixed, which is hardly "unlimited".

I understand market I'm in, 20 BTC is limit per mix not whole balance of the mixer

I don't want continue further discussions here, some of the updates will be on main topic also for forum deposits. Keep tracking if you want

[NeuroticFish]

When this site scams someone, which I think is quite likely to happen, will Gianluca95 take the fall for them and get tagged?

The campaign manager doesn't have to endorse the business he is advertising.
While indeed there are quite a number of red flags with that business, Gianluca's main job is to ensure the advertisers/users in the campaign will get paid correctly.
Now, if the company indeed scams, if the campaign still continues, then there's a problem for Gianluca and the people wearing the signature.


Until then, like in any modern legal system, we may have to offer the benefit of the doubt...

I understand market I'm in, 20 BTC is limit per mix not whole balance of the mixer

I think that it's in your interest to show a proof of funds if you indeed want to have a nice, proper and flourishing business.
Until now, no matter how open minded I would be, I would avoid your mixer, just in case. If you don't care to show proof of being able to do what you claim, why would I risk using your business, when there is plenty of competition around? Just think...

I've just read more into this topic, it's a lost cause, nevermind the last part.
Indeed, Gianluca95 should think it over good (and at least make sure that all the required funds are in his or an escrow's hands before the week starts). The situation is not the same as Royse since Royse was part of the business (unfortunately for him), but this also has the potential to backfire.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I understand market I'm in, 20 BTC is limit per mix not whole balance of the mixer

Ok. So roughly how much BTC do you have to support the operation of your mixer? Can you sign a message from an address holding some part of those funds?

Perhaps you could also explain why your Terms of Service and Privacy Policy are plagiarized word for word from /en/terms/]https://[banned mixer]/en/terms/?
And perhaps you could also explain why your letters of guarantee all return a bad signature from Jambler's public key?

[examplens]

When this site scams someone, which I think is quite likely to happen, will Gianluca95 take the fall for them and get tagged?

The campaign manager doesn't have to endorse the business he is advertising.
While indeed there are quite a number of red flags with that business, Gianluca's main job is to ensure the advertisers/users in the campaign will get paid correctly.
Now, if the company indeed scams, if the campaign still continues, then there's a problem for Gianluca and the people wearing the signature.

in the past we have had signature campaigns launched by proven fraudsters. they regularly paid all campaign participants, no one is tagged for that. we are now condemning before the scam happened.
somewhere in the essence, I myself advocate that it is better to prevent than to be sorry. but that's just my feeling, also as LoyceV thinks the scam is expected from Shaker finance.
Again, I don't see Ginaluca's mistake even if he continued the campaign, given that he kept the funds for the campaign.

btw. what will we do next with the other campaigns? most of those involved in these discussions are from the Bitcoin paid campaign but in the bounty section we have many campaigns, and we all know that the majority of them are scams. we follow them to a much lesser extent, so we are not committed
some are led by the best and most recognized managers, but after a few weeks of the campaign, no one is interested in the fate of the business behind them.

[NeuroticFish]

The campaign manager doesn't have to endorse the business he is advertising.
While indeed there are quite a number of red flags with that business, Gianluca's main job is to ensure the advertisers/users in the campaign will get paid correctly.
Now, if the company indeed scams, if the campaign still continues, then there's a problem for Gianluca and the people wearing the signature.

in the past we have had signature campaigns launched by proven fraudsters. they regularly paid all campaign participants, no one is tagged for that. we are now condemning before the scam happened.
somewhere in the essence, I myself advocate that it is better to prevent than to be sorry. but that's just my feeling, also as LoyceV thinks the scam is expected from Shaker finance.
Again, I don't see Ginaluca's mistake even if he continued the campaign, given that he kept the funds for the campaign.

btw. what will we do next with the other campaigns? most of those involved in these discussions are from the Bitcoin paid campaign but in the bounty section we have many campaigns, and we all know that the majority of them are scams. we follow them to a much lesser extent, so we are not committed
some are led by the best and most recognized managers, but after a few weeks of the campaign, no one is interested in the fate of the business behind them.

You should really have been quoting also the next line from my post. Without it.. it kinda sounds like you're trying to argue with me, .. telling exactly what I concluded with: unless anything proven, there's still the benefit of the doubt.

And I also said that he should be careful with the funds.
So I'd say we're on the same page.

[dkbit98]

Perhaps you could also explain why your Terms of Service and Privacy Policy are plagiarized word for word from /en/terms/]https://[banned mixer]/en/terms/?
And perhaps you could also explain why your letters of guarantee all return a bad signature from Jambler's public key?

He can't currently answer any of this questions because he is driving his $150k car looking on everyone else as lower race of human losers, but after he edits and correct this plagiarism it would be like it never happened.
Interesting thing is that [banned mixer] is also russian website like shaker.finance... just sayin.
Let me archive this two pages, just in case something happens with them in near future:
http://web.archive.org/web/20220718222958/https://shaker.finance/terms
http://web.archive.org/web/20220718223627/https://shaker.finance/privacy-policy

I have one suggestion to rename that mixer to Insulting.finance, I think it sounds more appropriate.