Crimes of signatures campaign affects forum?

[Onyeeze]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations. Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management? From my understanding it seems to me that bitcoin existence is different from the bitcointalk forum and without the existence of bitcointalk forum bitcoin will continue existing, what's your take on this.
This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur. Please I asked this few questions because I want to know what I don't know, and if my question is not ideal please don't crucify me.

[1714607137]

1714607137

[1714607137]

1714607137

[Findingnemo]

Bitcointalk is just a public forum where people gather around from crypto community and discuss things, the forum created by Satoshi who is also the founder of bitcointalk but there is no direct link between bitcoins and bitcointalk.

So even if the forum is no longer the Bitcoin will continue to exist until someone use it for transaction and miner exist to confirm the block.

AFAIK, signature campaign will not affect the bitcointalk existence in anyway because bitcointalk doesn't gain any financial benefit by allowing signature however in future if more of signature campaigns becomes affect the experience of forum then we can expect signature free forum too.

[Nwada001]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations.

I don't think any form of signature campaign can actually affect the forum. This is because the forum is an open area where spam is not moderated. You as an individual have the right to wear whatever you want under your signature space. If by any chance what you advertise under your signature space turns out to be illegal and attracts the government's attention, that's between you and the project. To be on the safe side, all you should do is take off the signature code.

Even if an investigation is to be made, it won't come directly to the forum, but it might have an individual attack on you, who was advertising the project in the first place, because those government officials will not agree that you don't know anything about the project. (But I doubt that can even happen.)

I believe one of the reasons why the forum stopped showing off ads is because of this kind of risk and to be on the safer side, not to directly advertise any project that might turn out to give the forum a bad name.

Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management?.

I never believed it before, until the CM issue, when I came across a discussion where one of the respected members made mention of such things as "that we should be prepared and we might actually see a similar welcome news here on the forum one day."

I would say it's possible, but that will only be if the government has enough reason to do that, although I know these days the SEC doesn't actually need reasons to do something; they just create one.

So I believe there are fewer things to worry about; the forum is organic and is not a direct threat to any government.

[Eternad]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations.

First of all, Advertisement of illegal item is not allowed in the forum so there’s no the government will bust the forum since it doesn’t promote illegal goods. In an event that a service that being promoted by forum member turns out to be violating the law, The campaign stop immediately which means we didn’t allow here to promote service that already committed the crime not before the crime is committed.

Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management? From my understanding it seems to me that bitcoin existence is different from the bitcointalk forum and without the existence of bitcointalk forum bitcoin will continue existing, what's your take on this.

Yes, Government can seize the forum if the management commit a crime based on what country jurisdiction the forum is under and what kind of crime. Any website online can be seize by the government if they have the warrant for it. But forum moderator is not dumb to do that. Theymos is very professional for a long time on running the forum smoothly.

This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur. Please I asked this few questions because I want to know what I don't know, and if my question is not ideal please don't crucify me.

You just need to take a break. Theymos create a poll recently about how to fix the broken image in the forum due to imgur issue. The timing of maintenance is in-line with his poll so probably he is just doing some solution on the broken image problem. There’s nothing to worry about and make sure to be updated on meta to prevent this kind of worrying.

[UchihaSarada]

Section 230 will be applied with Bitcointalk.

What is Section 230 and why should I care about it?
EU Digital Services Act and US Section 230: Decision-making processes and expected consequences

Staffs are required to not promote criminal services.

We (staff) were asked to stop advertising mixing services.

As for gambling services, then that's simply because of my religious beliefs.

[Stalker22]

Bitcointalk is basically just a forum platform where people discuss about all things crypto. It doesn't endorse any particular businesses, and therefore cannot be held responsible for any shady business going down.

Now, when it comes to signature campaigns, the responsibility falls on the organizers and the members themselves. The forum cannot be held accountable for the actions and choices made by individuals participating in these campaigns and who choose to wear certain signatures. But, there are also rules in place, right? Members are not allowed to promote illegal activities, and that applies to signatures too.

So, the bottom line is that everyone has to take personal responsibility. Bitcointalk provides a platform, but it is up to the users to make sure they are not doing things that could get them into trouble or engage in any activities that may have legal implications.

[Mpamaegbu]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations.

I guess you're making reference to the not too distant event with CM campaign and its sad end. To a great extent I do believe the abrupt manner that mixer site was shutdown showed the dimension and seriousness with which government could take things to if it meant it. I'm not a tech person but I do believe shutting down of this forum could also be possible but that could only be if there's incriminating evidence against it. CM fell out with the law and its advertisement ended here immediately. Except government can sufficiently prove that BTT was an active partner in the whole saga, I don't think it would want to go that way seizing its domain.

This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur.

Oh, really? I didn't even think of that dimension when I got a lot of calls and offline messages in that regard from members on this while BTT was down a few days ago. If I did, I would've played a fast one on those worrying callers by pranking them that the site had been yanked off by government 🤪

[KingsDen]

Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management?

Maybe, which is why theymos asked the forum moderators and staff not to promote mixers.

In an event that a service that being promoted by forum member turns out to be violating the law, The campaign stop immediately

Has this ever happened? Has any campaign been stopped in the forum because it is violating any country's law?

[Onyeeze]

Bitcointalk is basically just a forum platform where people discuss about all things crypto. It doesn't endorse any particular businesses, and therefore cannot be held responsible for any shady business going down.

Now, when it comes to signature campaigns, the responsibility falls on the organizers and the members themselves. The forum cannot be held accountable for the actions and choices made by individuals participating in these campaigns and who choose to wear certain signatures. But, there are also rules in place, right? Members are not allowed to promote illegal activities, and that applies to signatures too.

So, the bottom line is that everyone has to take personal responsibility. Bitcointalk provides a platform, but it is up to the users to make sure they are not doing things that could get them into trouble or engage in any activities that may have legal implications.

So you want me to believe that no crime of signature campaign that can affects the forum, and if action should be taken if a signatures campaign commit crime that will bring intervention of government the action will go directly to the organisers of that particular signatures campaign, that means that forum is autonomous and everyone is promoting its business will bear the consequences when issue's or when theirs complications of distrust and investigations.

[Stalker22]

Bitcointalk is basically just a forum platform where people discuss about all things crypto. It doesn't endorse any particular businesses, and therefore cannot be held responsible for any shady business going down.

Now, when it comes to signature campaigns, the responsibility falls on the organizers and the members themselves. The forum cannot be held accountable for the actions and choices made by individuals participating in these campaigns and who choose to wear certain signatures. But, there are also rules in place, right? Members are not allowed to promote illegal activities, and that applies to signatures too.

So, the bottom line is that everyone has to take personal responsibility. Bitcointalk provides a platform, but it is up to the users to make sure they are not doing things that could get them into trouble or engage in any activities that may have legal implications.

So you want me to believe that no crime of signature campaign that can affects the forum, and if action should be taken if a signatures campaign commit crime that will bring intervention of government the action will go directly to the organisers of that particular signatures campaign, that means that forum is autonomous and everyone is promoting its business will bear the consequences when issue's or when theirs complications of distrust and investigations.

Criminal activities can occur in any context, including within signature campaigns. If a signature campaign is found to involve criminal behavior that could attract government intervention, it is reasonable to assume that the forum administrators would not allow such a campaign to continue. If the criminal activity is discovered after individuals have already participated in the campaign, they may not be held liable if they were unaware of the illegal actions taking place.

But all this is purely hypothetical and based on my assumptions. As far as I know, there have not been any specific cases of signature campaigns involving criminal activities on this forum.

Take mixer services as an example. Mixer services, in and of themselves, are not inherently illegal. However, there have been instances where some mixer services have been investigated and accused of engaging in illegal activities, such as the Chipmixer case. And yet, no sanctions or interventions came from the governing agencies because the CM advertised through signature campaigns.

[Adbitco]

As they mention already forum is just a community and is open for promotion, if any signature campaign found violating any law of their country it won't affect the forum for any reason rather Mod can only be warned not to promote such project anymore.
For instance, just take a real life as a case study; let say you go to market to sell clothes or whatever you wants to sell knowing that that place is a market to sell your goods and if happens that what you took to the market doesn't traded in that line you take it to, the authority may asked you to moved it out from that line to the normal place where it is meant to be. They do not locked the market or even ban people from buying and selling in that market. So it's here, nothing affects forum.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

I believe your concern also has to do with the closure of the longest running campaign (chipmixer) on the forum and the investigation ongoing on the issues of money laundering and maybe any other fraudulent activities the FBI might charge them with in the future. You shouldn't  be worried as I think the forum is safe from any charges the FBI is giving to chipmixer or any campaign in the future. Signature aren't endorsed by the forum therefore they can't be held responsibility for the crimes of the project advertising here. The only time they forum would be questions is when they were advertising this projects personally through the ad slots that the forum offers that has now been stopped by theymos.

Bitcointallk is not different from reddit and other online forum as they're just an online platform that projects can be advertised on. Also without theymos this forum can function as we have those that can take over management (if I'm not mistaking). If the management commits a crime they can be called for questioning but that doesn't mean the forum will die. If the website dormin name was seized for some reason, we can always migrate to a new dormin (I believe that has been done before but not because the previous dormin was seized) and all accounts can be teleported as well. The forum is saved from project advertising on the forum because the forum doesn't moderate them but if the authorities ask the forum to stop giving those particular project a platform to advertise, they have to obey.

[Baofeng]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations. Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management? From my understanding it seems to me that bitcoin existence is different from the bitcointalk forum and without the existence of bitcointalk forum bitcoin will continue existing, what's your take on this.
This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur. Please I asked this few questions because I want to know what I don't know, and if my question is not ideal please don't crucify me.

You are not the only who experienced that issues. It went offline for:

[..snip..]
That means it was down for everyone for 3 hours and 8 minutes.

And according to Theymos:

My best guess at this point is that it was a random failure of some networking hardware. It doesn't look like any failure I've seen before, so it's difficult to diagnose. It doesn't particularly look like a DDoS or other attack, though I can't rule it out.

There won't be any downtime if/when I change anything regarding images.

So it has nothing to do with signature campaigns in this community.

I'm not really sure about your questions about government investigation, but let me cite our dear administrator again:

This is not very surprising/interesting, but I thought I'd mention that I received a subpoena for information related to Ross Ulbricht's alleged forum account altoid. I mostly just compiled some publicly-available information. The only non-public data I had to include were some deleted posts in the heroin store topic that were not written by DPR and probably won't be useful in the case.

You might be surprised to learn that this is the first subpoena I've received for the forum.

[Onyeeze]

I believe your concern also has to do with the closure of the longest running campaign (chipmixer) on the forum and the investigation ongoing on the issues of money laundering and maybe any other fraudulent activities the FBI might charge them with in the future. You shouldn't  be worried as I think the forum is safe from any charges the FBI is giving to chipmixer

I have no fear for anything, I asked a question because of my worries of government seizing a website with some reasons and I have none ideas of FBI investigating the forum, I just asked my question on a neutral ground because of what I thought of crime and government intervention, I have be cleared of signaturesm campaign not to contribute an act that will leads of seizing this website, since forum no crime of signatures campaign can cause problem to bitcointalk I have no worries, because I notice a signature campaign that all the participants is on red tag and the name is 1xbit, won't this signature campaign bring a negative name for bitcointalk because of their several accusations which has not be clarify?  Can't government investigate forum because of their act??

[Bitcoin_Arena]

I have be cleared of signaturesm campaign not to contribute an act that will leads of seizing this website, since forum no crime of signatures campaign can cause problem to bitcointalk I have no worries, because I notice a signature campaign that all the participants is on red tag and the name is 1xbit, won't this signature campaign bring a negative name for bitcointalk because of their several accusations which has not be clarify?  Can't government investigate forum because of their act??

This is no big deal

For example Google advertises so many scams and they are even bigger than this forum, so why aren't they investigated and arrest for taking money from scammers and facilitating scam by advertising them?

Why would FBI cherry pick Bitcointalk and leave out Google, Reddit, Facebook?

Ooh, did i forget to tell you that 1xbet, a sister scam company to 1xbit also appears in La Liga and Seria A display boards?

[coin-investor]

Signature campaigns are considered a third party and the forum is not collaborating with any of these, in fact, Bitcointalk stops advertising through bidding so the forum is not endorsing anything even their staff are being restricted from promoting certain platforms so how can the forum be affected, we all know that 1xbit is free to launch a campaign here but they are not charged or accused of collaboration.
Because the forum maintains its policy of openness and not moderating platforms except drugs and selling of arms.

[philipma1957]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations. Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management? From my understanding it seems to me that bitcoin existence is different from the bitcointalk forum and without the existence of bitcointalk forum bitcoin will continue existing, what's your take on this.
This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur. Please I asked this few questions because I want to know what I don't know, and if my question is not ideal please don't crucify me.

I think the forum could be punished for breaking laws. Laws differ from place to place.

No saying what could happen to it in the future. Also chipmixer was a big payer of bounties here. No telling if the forum faces issues down the road on this.

[Poker Player]

So you want me to believe that no crime of signature campaign that can affects the forum, and if action should be taken if a signatures campaign commit crime 

Get your facts straight because to begin with, signatures are not subjects that can commit crimes. If you don't express yourself well you are not helping your case.

I don't know why you have so much insistence on something that was already discussed at the time: mixers are not banned today, therefore to wear the advertising of a mixer or any other service that is not banned today is not illegal.

The order of theymos to the staff seems more a move of extreme caution than anything else, because the moment the mixers or any other service that is advertised in signature campaigns in the forum is declared illegal in the USA especially, the signatures of that service will be banned from the forum.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

I have taught of this seriously and I began to have a biased concern to bitcointalk if any signatures campaigns in bitcointalk can affects the existence of bitcointalk if they commit a crime that leads to government investigations.

First of all, I wish to commend you on this insightful question you just asked, and I will like to give you a brief example. You could all remember there was a signature campaign known as "ChipMixer", and months later we got to noticed it has been seized by the U.S government and under investigation. So did the investigation affect the forum? The answer is "NO", or did its investigation affect it's forum campaign participants? The answer is also "NO".
So in summary @ O.P, that answers your question that an investigation of a signature campaign can never affect the activities of the forum.

Secondly do we believe that bitcointalk can  be obstructed by government if their is a noticeable crime by the management?

For me, I think that can only be possible only if the forum domain is under the host of a government regulated firm, but if the forum has an independent host, then that is likely not going to be possible..
But I stand to be corrected if I'm wrong on this.

From my understanding it seems to me that bitcoin existence is different from the bitcointalk forum and without the existence of bitcointalk forum bitcoin will continue existing, what's your take on this.

The forum was the official place for the discussion of the development of Bitcoin, so it has an important role to play in the continue use of Bitcoin

This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur

I thought I was the only one who noticed the domain "error" display few days ago when trying to login the forum, but never knew it was general, and as such that calls for concern, and I hope Sir Theymos needs to do something about it so that such doesn't occur anymore. Thanks

[noorman0]

-snip-
This idea came to me through what happened to the site of bitcointalk few days ago which I couldn't logins my account for sometimes, I wasn't happy when the incident occur. Please I asked this few questions because I want to know what I don't know, and if my question is not ideal please don't crucify me.

Cloudflare's server problems are not related at all to the business activities of users on this forum, and actually we are used to it.
If the access failure is due to government interference, then as is the case in many seizures of stopped service sites, there is usually a special warning indicating they are taking action with the forum. As far as such a warning (afaik) has never happened, I wouldn't worry too much about signature campaign activities.