[WARNING] Whirlwind.money - withdrawals are not being processed ⚠️

[decodx]

What happened:
Earlier today, I put in a deposit on the Whirlwind.money mixing service. After the transaction got the required number of confirmations, I requested for a withdrawal from my note to a wallet address with a 0-hour delay. However, it's been 10 hours now, and the transaction hasn't been processed or shown up on the blockchain. There wasn't any warning or indication of the service being down, and I just realized later that there were issues. It turns out other members were also in the same boat, waiting for their money.

Profile Link: whirlwindmoney
[edit] Type 3 Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3197

Reference Link: [ANN] Whirlwind.money | ⚡No Fee⚡ | Ultimate Privacy | Anonymity Mining 12% APR🔥
Website Link: https://whirlwind.money/
Amount Claimed: 0.004 BTC
Payment Method: bitcoin
Proof of Payment: here's all the evidence

Additional Notes:
Based on information shared by some members in the ANN thread, it appears that whirlwind hasn't been handling any withdrawals since August 9th (which is almost 5 full days as of the time of writing).

Please update us on this.
This sounds extremely weird. You do still see the satoshi's in your note, don't you?

No, the Note balance has updatet but there has been no transaction so far. Something seems stuck.

My last withdrawal was on the 9th, got the coins.

Looking at an explorer, the last outgoing transactions were made on that date: https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/addresses/btc/bc1qf8h5k6sash8007vpesymxkw2xsg5d0r3j4l5vmcrwpz2pqu66fjstzgd3r

Thank you for that information! As I made my withdrawal on the 11th, I guess that something is stuck :/

I made a withdrawal of 0.025 BTC yesterday afternoon (like you with 0 hours delay) and so far nothing. Did you get the money, or email reply yet?

And there are a few other issues as well. LoyceV summarized it nicely:

So, to summarize (and correct me if I got anything wrong):

• The website isn't profitable (yet)
• Deposits are working
• The website claims to pay a very high 12% APR on deposits
• The daily awards aren't always being added
• Withdrawals stopped working 5 days ago
• The signature campaign payments happen off-chain and thus can't be withdrawn now
• User whirlwindmoney hasn't been here for more than a month
• Support doesn't respond to inquiries

No matter what the reason is, this looks bad.

This isn't a scam accusation (at least not yet), but a heads-up for the community. Taking everything into account, I believe it's in everyone's best interest to hold off on using the service for the time being. It would be wise to wait until we get some feedback from their representatives and the service gets back on track. I'll keep this thread updated as the situation progresses.

[1715272093]

1715272093

[1715272093]

1715272093

[Gladitorcomeback]

This is not looking fair enough and you Whirlwind will loss their trust if they didn't solve this issue on time. Any issue regarding payment should be solved In 72 hours, if they delay then "something is Fishy". You done a great job by posting it here so until this problem not solve , no one should try Whirlwind service.

Why not whirlwind team make deposit and withdraw decentralized if possible to make their service more smooth. I think if they release all payment now but still there will be doubt in every mixer user to use it especially when amount is big.

[albon]

This isn't a scam accusation (at least not yet), but a heads-up for the community. Taking everything into account, I believe it's in everyone's best interest to hold off on using the service for the time being. It would be wise to wait until we get some feedback from their representatives and the service gets back on track. I'll keep this thread updated as the situation progresses.

It's good that you posted this thread to draw the community's attention to Whirlwind's mysterious events. So far, they haven't responded to emails sent to reassure their customers about concerns highlighted by members and withdrawals that haven't been processed and completed yet. The other thing is that Hhampuz has put their signature campaign on "HOLD." I agree with him in his remarks regarding that no one should deposit his currencies or use their services, such as generating a note or withdrawing and the like, until things become apparent in the coming days; I hope that they will respond to their emails as soon as possible, or that their representative on the forum, whose last activity was July 04, 2023, will attend to update the topic of the announcement and reassure and calm the users of the mixer. The whirlwind team has paid a lot and done a lot to promote their platform. Their services have been running smoothly for a long time. I hope that things return to normal again.

[notblox1]

Based on information shared by some members in the ANN thread, it appears that whirlwind hasn't been handling any withdrawals since August 9th (which is almost 5 full days as of the time of writing).

Mixers are always risky and under attack from governments so it is better to wait few more days before taking further action, but everything will be resolved for you OP.
I see their website is also down for some reason, but have you tried sending them email or talking with them in some other way?
They have campaign in forum and manager also needs to explain what is happening.

[TryNinja]

I see their website is also down for some reason, but have you tried sending them email or talking with them in some other way?
They have campaign in forum and manager also needs to explain what is happening.

Clearnet has been down for quite a bit, even while they were active in here. Tor is still up.

The campaign manager is responsible for… managing the campaign, which is already paused. He has nothing to do with their lack of communication or even (hopefully not) potential exit scam.

[notblox1]

The campaign manager is responsible for… managing the campaign. He has nothing to do with their downtime or even (hopefully not) potential exit scam.

I am not blaming anyone but campaign manager should be in contact with owner of website that created campaign, and I saw members are saying owner is not active in forum for months.
Was there any communication between them during this time or not? How was campaign being paid? Was there any early red flags?
This are very important question and we are hoping to receive answers on them.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Posting here, since this is a dedicated topic for this problem.

Also, for people with funds in there, are the daily mining rewards coming through? Didn’t they say they do those manually?

I did not get any reward in the past 3 days. My last reward was sent on Friday (August 11th).

[examplens]

I am not blaming anyone but campaign manager should be in contact with owner of website that created campaign, and I saw members are saying owner is not active in forum for months.

Even without communication with the owner, the campaign worked until (last 5 days) there were problems with the withdrawal of funds.
The manager did what was necessary to protect the campaign participants and put them on pause.

Was there any communication between them during this time or not? How was campaign being paid? Was there any early red flags?
This are very important question and we are hoping to receive answers on them.

Feel free to visit their ANN and you will get most of the answers to your questions, although the OP summarized the whole problem.

[yhiaali3]

Really unfortunate news, a while ago I read this news about withdrawal issues from the Whirlwind mixer and also that the campaign manager has put the campaign on Hold and is urging everyone to remove their signatures until the situation is clear because he hasn't gotten a response from Whirlwind yet.

It's unfortunate to see this situation because Whirlwind was one of the favorite Mixers to take a big place in the market. I hope this is only a temporary problem and is resolved quickly otherwise they will lose their credibility and the trust they have started to build so well in the forum with their signature campaign.

[Yaunfitda]

Really unfortunate news, a while ago I read this news about withdrawal issues from the Whirlwind mixer and also that the campaign manager has put the campaign on Hold and is urging everyone to remove their signatures until the situation is clear because he hasn't gotten a response from Whirlwind yet.

It's unfortunate to see this situation because Whirlwind was one of the favorite Mixers to take a big place in the market. I hope this is only a temporary problem and is resolved quickly otherwise they will lose their credibility and the trust they have started to build so well in the forum with their signature campaign.

I wouldn't say one of the favorite mixers, but with their signature campaigns and getting almost all previous CM participants, they become this sort of reputable mixer out there as there are competitions after CM shutdowns.

Just read the issues about it in their ANN thread, yeah, doesn't want to speculate, but something is fishy behind and hopefully as the OP posted it here, everyone will check this board first before using their services.

[coin-investor]

I am not blaming anyone but campaign manager should be in contact with owner of website that created campaign, and I saw members are saying owner is not active in forum for months.

Even without communication with the owner, the campaign worked until (last 5 days) there were problems with the withdrawal of funds.
The manager did what was necessary to protect the campaign participants and put them on pause.

The campaign manager did the right thing at the right time their lack of communication and issues with withdrawal an alarm that something was wrong, I thought this was one of the mixing campaigns that was going to last long and also had a shot at becoming of the replacement of CM, the representative is not active anymore here in this forum for over a month.

[Billo_]

Yes
It really looks like exit scam.
Site is not accessible anymore: http://whirlwind.money/
Really sad news but I've called it earlier when I've sait it's just a matter of time: 

Issue is many services are shady. It's only a question of time until we see an exit scam again or fraud operator like ChipMixer.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5461534.msg62653382#msg62653382

Luckily, miner jones has funds in escrow, he can compensate Bitcointalk member:

Funds are still in escrow:

https://etherscan.io/token/0x6b175474e89094c44da98b954eedeac495271d0f?a=0x3655b6d78d59e0db15f13d66c5fd552e0c884b7b

[logfiles]

There's an Update from Hhampuz that I have seen in the ANN thread. Hopefully everything goes back to normal. No need to panic for now

I got an email back from whirlwind just now and it was as I suspected - something happened.

Basically, main people lost access due to travels while people still with access didn't have the right credentials to solve basic issues that caused withdraws to get stuck on the back-end. I've been assured that nothing has been lost and that all will be taken care of tomorrow meaning all currently pending withdraws will be processed and things return back to normal. It was an unfortunate situation is all!

I've asked my contact at whirlwind to reply in this thread whenever they can with further details, so from now until then/tomorrow night there is no need to panic even if I wouldn't recommend you to deposit until the backlog is cleared. Campaign participants will also be paid out as per usual tomorrow, regardless of if you've removed your signature or not.

Yes
It really looks like exit scam.
Site is not accessible anymore: http://whirlwind.money/
Really sad news but I've called it earlier when I've sait it's just a matter of time: 

What is the matter with you. Do you take time to read?
Several members says the clearnet has been off for a while but the onion site was functional until recently.

[fillippone]

I am monitoring the multi signature address with https://cryptocurrencyalerting.com/wallet-watch.html#
In case something changes, I will be notified.

You can do the same, in case.

I am not affiliated with this website, nor I have any clue about the correct working.

[Text]

Thanks for the heads-up for the community. It is wise to wait until we get some feedback from their representatives and the service gets back on track before using it. There is not much you can do except wait and hope that the service will resume its normal operations soon. I suggest that you avoid using this service until the situation is resolved. I hope you get your money back soon.

Given the complexity of the situation and the potential risks involved, it's recommended to follow the advice of LoyceV and exercise caution when using the Whirlwind.money service. It would be prudent to await further communication from the service's representatives and to gather more information about the ongoing issues before making any further deposits or withdrawals. Always prioritize the security of your funds and stay informed about the latest developments.

[holydarkness]

Thanks for the heads-up for the community. It is wise to wait until we get some feedback from their representatives and the service gets back on track before using it. There is not much you can do except wait and hope that the service will resume its normal operations soon. I suggest that you avoid using this service until the situation is resolved. I hope you get your money back soon.

Given the complexity of the situation and the potential risks involved, it's recommended to follow the advice of LoyceV and exercise caution when using the Whirlwind.money service. It would be prudent to await further communication from the service's representatives and to gather more information about the ongoing issues before making any further deposits or withdrawals. Always prioritize the security of your funds and stay informed about the latest developments.

I think you're a bit behind on the development of the entire whirlwind's situation. There's already a reply and explanation made by Hhampuz on their ANN thread, which also quoted by Logfiles on post #14 of this thread.

[fillippone]

I think you're a bit behind on the development of the entire whirlwind's situation. There's already a reply and explanation made by Hhampuz on their ANN thread, which also quoted by Logfiles on post #14 of this thread.

To be fair, Hhampuz's statement, which I have no doubt is in good faith and absolutely represents his messages exchange with Whirlwind, does not change the situation much.
Deposit release and processing will do, together with clear communication with the community.
Until then, I would still recommend maximum alert.

[examplens]

Deposit release and processing will do, together with clear communication with the community.
Until then, I would still recommend maximum alert.

I completely agree that you should be extremely careful here, at least until some time passes and the service continues to work without issue.
The problem happened because a significant part of the team lost access due to travel, I think that without access they cannot determine the exact amount of damage.

[fillippone]

The problem happened because a significant part of the team lost access due to travel, I think that without access they cannot determine the exact amount of damage.

As I understood, there is no “damage” I.e. Loss of funds. , but for sure this delay in communication is very worrying.
Don’t forget they told Hhampuz everything would have been fixed by today.

[decodx]

I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who has offered their support here. I appreciate it. Unfortunately, there hasn't been any progress on my whirlwind case. My money is still stuck with them, and the available balance on my private note displays: 0 BTC, without any explanation provided whatsoever. I get that a hundred bucks or so might not be a big deal to a bunch of folks here, but it's a big deal to me. It's not gonna break the bank, but hey, it's still my money we're talking about!

I'm really open to hearing your thoughts on what my next move should be. What would you do if you were in my shoes? Your opinions are much appreciated!

[examplens]

I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who has offered their support here. I appreciate it. Unfortunately, there hasn't been any progress on my whirlwind case. My money is still stuck with them, and the available balance on my private note displays: 0 BTC, without any explanation provided whatsoever. I get that a hundred bucks or so might not be a big deal to a bunch of folks here, but it's a big deal to me. It's not gonna break the bank, but hey, it's still my money we're talking about!

I'm really open to hearing your thoughts on what my next move should be. What would you do if you were in my shoes? Your opinions are much appreciated!

Honestly, I didn't like the whole idea of staking on their platform from the beginning. I see every mixer as a platform that should serve as simply as possible and in the shortest time. When we add to that the regular difficulties and risks for each mixer, holding Bitcoin there is a bad idea for users.
I talked about it at the beginning of the implementation of this idea

decodx, In your case, I would be patient for a while longer, considering the last communication between the campaign manager and the Whirlwind representative. Take into account the possible time difference, so accept a maximum waiting time. You certainly have every right to ask for your money, it's somehow especially bad when you lose money that you entrusted to someone. Regardless of whether it is $100 or $5000 or even more.
I didn't use their service after the introduction of anonymity mining, but are there any traces that you can use to prove the last unsuccessful withdrawal? In case of a refund from a third ^escrow party.

[decodx]

decodx, In your case, I would be patient for a while longer, considering the last communication between the campaign manager and the Whirlwind representative. Take into account the possible time difference, so accept a maximum waiting time. You certainly have every right to ask for your money, it's somehow especially bad when you lose money that you entrusted to someone. Regardless of whether it is $100 or $5000 or even more.
I didn't use their service after the introduction of anonymity mining, but are there any traces that you can use to prove the last unsuccessful withdrawal? In case of a refund from a third ^escrow party.

Thanks. I didn't use their "anonymity mining" feature either. All I wanted was to mix some coins that I use to pay for certain services, in order to enhance my privacy, just like I've done in the past.

I've got all the evidence, and I sent it to them privately because I didn't want to put it out in the open just yet. I've got my note's public address, the Letter of Guarantee, the TXID for my deposit, and I can even sign the address I used to deposit if they want. Of course, I don't know how to prove that I didn't get anything back since they haven't made any transaction from their end.

[Nwada001]

I'm really open to hearing your thoughts on what my next move should be. What would you do if you were in my shoes? Your opinions are much appreciated!

It hurts to get your funds stock somewhere because of the inconvenience it might have caused you as a result of not getting the money when needed. But there is nothing that could really be done right now rather than just waiting for a positive response from them, as they assured Hhampu to get things working again in the next few hours, which is near. I will just have to advise you to be patient and wait a little longer if withdrawal is not processed. At least the team should be able to come in and clear the air with a detailed explanation of the matter at hand if it's something different from just being far from the authorization access.

[TryNinja]

I've got my note's public address, the Letter of Guarantee, the TXID for my deposit, and I can even sign the address I used to deposit if they want. Of course, I don't know how to prove that I didn't get anything back since they haven't made any transaction from their end.

Hopefully you don’t have to do that, but it’s quite trivial. You said have a signed LoG saying you withdrew X BTC to the address Y, all you have to do is post the note and everyone can see through a block explorer that your address hasn’t received the coins.

[fillippone]

decodx, In your case, I would be patient for a while longer, considering the last communication between the campaign manager and the Whirlwind representative. Take into account the possible time difference, so accept a maximum waiting time.

Still, all that they told Hhampuz didn't happen. I didn't see any variation on their exchange wallet, as no deposit was processed, nor any post here on the forum. They didn’t answer my email, or process any mining reward payments (those are totally off chain).
Given the amount of scrutiny they are facing, not ideal.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who has offered their support here. I appreciate it. Unfortunately, there hasn't been any progress on my whirlwind case. My money is still stuck with them, and the available balance on my private note displays: 0 BTC, without any explanation provided whatsoever. I get that a hundred bucks or so might not be a big deal to a bunch of folks here, but it's a big deal to me. It's not gonna break the bank, but hey, it's still my money we're talking about!

I'm really open to hearing your thoughts on what my next move should be. What would you do if you were in my shoes? Your opinions are much appreciated!

Honestly, I didn't like the whole idea of staking on their platform from the beginning. I see every mixer as a platform that should serve as simply as possible and in the shortest time. When we add to that the regular difficulties and risks for each mixer, holding Bitcoin there is a bad idea for users.
I talked about it at the beginning of the implementation of this idea

Point [1.] When someone is going to ask me to stake my bitcoin in a wallet where I have no control then I will say no. Not my key not my coin. I fail to understand why bitcointalk members fail to realize this simple law of bitcoin.
Point [2.] Considering the nature of the business [mixers], I like something which will give my coins as fast as it is possible. Today a mixer looks very popular and promising, after few hours it can be seized by the authority or anything can happen and if my coins are there then I will lose it.

Unusual mixing method nature: Here is another thing I find really bad. Normally when an address is given from a mixer with their Letter of Guarantee, the letter includes deposit address, amount [either deposit or withdrawal] and withdrawal address. Give attention, there are THREE key information you need to verify instead of trusting the words and all three should be in the letter. But unfortunately in WWM you have no chance to have these three keys together. The note system made is complected. If I send 1 btc to mix and then if I withdraw 0.5 btc and 0.5 left in my note but today if that disappears and WWM demands that I myself withdrew it, how will I prove it wrong?

I've got all the evidence, and I sent it to them privately because I didn't want to put it out in the open just yet. I've got my note's public address, the Letter of Guarantee, the TXID for my deposit, and I can even sign the address I used to deposit if they want. Of course, I don't know how to prove that I didn't get anything back since they haven't made any transaction from their end.

This Letter of Guarantee is useless I think if you are talking about the Letter when you deposited.

[decodx]

It hurts to get your funds stock somewhere because of the inconvenience it might have caused you as a result of not getting the money when needed. But there is nothing that could really be done right now rather than just waiting for a positive response from them, as they assured Hhampu to get things working again in the next few hours, which is near. I will just have to advise you to be patient and wait a little longer if withdrawal is not processed. At least the team should be able to come in and clear the air with a detailed explanation of the matter at hand if it's something different from just being far from the authorization access.

Thank you. I hope you're right.

I've got my note's public address, the Letter of Guarantee, the TXID for my deposit, and I can even sign the address I used to deposit if they want. Of course, I don't know how to prove that I didn't get anything back since they haven't made any transaction from their end.

Hopefully you don’t have to do that, but it’s quite trivial. You said have a signed LoG saying you withdrew X BTC to the address Y, all you have to do is post the note and everyone can see through a block explorer that your address hasn’t received the coins.

Yes, you're right. Luckily, I've saved both LoGs - one for my deposit and another for my withdrawal.

decodx, In your case, I would be patient for a while longer, considering the last communication between the campaign manager and the Whirlwind representative. Take into account the possible time difference, so accept a maximum waiting time.

Still, all that they told Hhampuz didn't happen. I didn't see any variation on their exchange wallet, as no deposit was processed, nor any post here on the forum. They didn’t answer my email, or process any mining reward payments (those are totally off chain).
Given the amount of scrutiny they are facing, not ideal.

Honestly, I was a bit surprised when I saw that Hhampuz decided to resume the signature campaign and suggested that everyone can put their signatures back up. This is despite the fact that the Whirlwind service is still non-functional, and there's a risk that using the mixing service could result in money being stuck on the platform. But of course, I don't really know who he's talking to or what he's been told to assure him that everything will be fine. I just want to point out that I haven't received any response from them so far, and I find it odd that they're communicating with the campaign manager while ignoring their customers.

<...>
This Letter of Guarantee is useless I think if you are talking about the Letter when you deposited.

BitcoinGirl.Club I completely agree with both of your points. Regarding their withdrawal method, it seems like they wanted to emulate ChipMixer, although it seems to me that CM did it slightly better.
You are also right about the Letter of Guarantee. Luckily I have both, but it wouldn't have been like that if I hadn't requested a withdrawal and the balance on my note disappeared.

[albon]

It hurts to get your funds stock somewhere because of the inconvenience it might have caused you as a result of not getting the money when needed. But there is nothing that could really be done right now rather than just waiting for a positive response from them, as they assured Hhampu to get things working again in the next few hours, which is near. I will just have to advise you to be patient and wait a little longer if withdrawal is not processed. At least the team should be able to come in and clear the air with a detailed explanation of the matter at hand if it's something different from just being far from the authorization access.

Unfortunately, there is a sad piece of news I have read that the whirlwind team has not come to post an update yet regarding the things that happened last week on their site, so veteran bounty manager Hhampuz will not continue to promote this signature campaign and will be put it on hold indefinitely. The payments have already been sent for round 20 to Participants to their notes, and the signature campaign participants can now remove signatures and avatars.

Round 20 Payments have been sent to your Notes!

Thank you all for yet another great week. Unfortunately I'm putting this campaign on hold indefinitely. I was hoping whirlwind would have come here and posted an update by now but we discussed the campaign among other things last night and right now it's looking like we will not continue with this campaign. It's been nearly 5 months and while I would have hoped things to turn out in a different way it is what it is. It's been an absolute pleasure to work with a lot of you, some for the first time, and hopefully we can do so again in the future.

I'm patiently waiting for whirlwind to come back to the forum with their update and comments regarding the "frozen" state of the site over this past week.

You can now remove your Signatures and Avatars and apply to other campaigns.

I do not know frankly what circumstances the whirlwind team is going through, which prevented them from returning to write an update to reassure the community and respond to their emails. I hope that the withdrawal will open and process mining reward payments and that the Whirlwind mixer clients complete their transactions smoothly, and that the signature campaign will return ASAP so that the community’s concern does not increase and does not get a wrong impression about this Whirlwind Mixer.

[Nwada001]

Honestly, I was a bit surprised when I saw that Hhampuz decided to resume the signature campaign and suggested that everyone can put their signatures back up. This is despite the fact that the Whirlwind service is still non-functional, and there's a risk that using the mixing service could result in money being stuck on the platform. But of course, I don't really know who he's talking to or what he's been told to assure him that everything will be fine. I just want to point out that I haven't received any response from them so far, and I find it odd that they're communicating with the campaign manager while ignoring their customers.

The campaign was paused after several issues with users not receiving their withdrawal yet and was later reopened after the manager got feedback from the team with the assurance that everything would be resolved in the next couple of hours, which the manager also shared with the community both on the ANN thread and that of the Signature campaign thread.
This night, the manager seems to be disappointed by the lack of action by the team, as they have failed to keep to their part of the process in regard to getting the issue resolved and also addressing the issue. I think it's really the right thing to do to get the campaign paused for the main time so that those who are not aware of the ongoing situation might not move ahead to use the service and also get their money stocked in their accounts.

Edit: @albon Just got the information few minutes ago.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

<...>
This Letter of Guarantee is useless I think if you are talking about the Letter when you deposited.

BitcoinGirl.Club I completely agree with both of your points. Regarding their withdrawal method, it seems like they wanted to emulate ChipMixer, although it seems to me that CM did it slightly better.
You are also right about the Letter of Guarantee. Luckily I have both, but it wouldn't have been like that if I hadn't requested a withdrawal and the balance on my note disappeared.

Point is, I will not trust a mixing service to hold my coin for long days. With Chipmixer they provided me the withdrawal private keys as soon as one confirmation was made of my deposit. When the private keys are in my possession, it was my responsibility to secure any coin on the keys, they never encouraged me to hold the coins in those private keys. I don't see anything for WWM that they wanted to emulate with Chipmixer. They wanted to take the empty space of Chipmixer and the hype they created was with the unexpected very high paying signature campaign.

Look at it from the business perspective:
[1.] Is the business making enough money? No.
[2.] What is the ratio of business and marketing expense? Very abnormal ratio of expense than income.
If I have a thousand btc then may be I can afford it, question is do they have a thousand btc? All we saw were few btc on that 2 of 3 address and $40k deposited to minerjones. I really hope I am wrong about them and they will come back to operate normal like before.

One very important concern in the business model was the way they always encouraged people to keep the coins in their platform. All they provided was a private note with some numbers and text string, you can not use publicly to verify balance. Does it sound like a Ponzi scheme?

So right now you have no balance is showing on your note but you did not receive the coin too?

[Billo_]

Yes
It really looks like exit scam.
Site is not accessible anymore: http://whirlwind.money/
Really sad news but I've called it earlier when I've sait it's just a matter of time:  

What is the matter with you. Do you take time to read?
Several members says the clearnet has been off for a while but the onion site was functional until recently.

I have read, Sir
It's still not work today and I will just wait for more official announcement.

I've got all the evidence, and I sent it to them privately because I didn't want to put it out in the open just yet. I've got my note's public address, the Letter of Guarantee, the TXID for my deposit, and I can even sign the address I used to deposit if they want. Of course, I don't know how to prove that I didn't get anything back since they haven't made any transaction from their end.

We will receive coins back if whirlwind money has given a guarantee on it?
How will it work, Sir?

It's not like private key isn't it?
Only for private key, coins is really our coin.


shasan just reported it doesn't work for him as well:

I am trying to withdraw funds for several weeks. But when I try to open the site it shows to me like the mentioned images. I think it is happening only to me as I could not find out any post like this.

[decodx]

So right now you have no balance is showing on your note but you did not receive the coin too?

That's right. I created a note, deposited funds, and then requested a withdrawal to different addresses. Whirlwind executed all these steps without any apparent issues, and now my note's balance displays 0 BTC. However, the coins never actually arrived in my wallet.

[hugeblack]

I visited the site a little while ago, I created a note, and pressed deposit button, and there is no warning about using the service or that there are problems with withdrawal, and this is a very bad indicator, if there is a problem, at least make a big warning before deposit.


According to the multi-signature address, the withdrawal was on the 9th and there is no update, so I think that the number of people whose money is still in the service is large. Does anyone know what the terms of the contract with @minerjones? Are 40k only for review campaign, or can they be used to compensate users if the service turns into scam?

One very important concern in the business model was the way they always encouraged people to keep the coins in their platform. All they provided was a private note with some numbers and text string, you can not use publicly to verify balance. Does it sound like a Ponzi scheme?

The idea of the site is unique and their technical background is good, but it seems that they do not have enough liquidity to create a decentralized mixing service. we'll have to wait a long time to see a mixing service with blinded bearer certificates.

[examplens]

According to the multi-signature address, the withdrawal was on the 9th and there is no update, so I think that the number of people whose money is still in the service is large. Does anyone know what the terms of the contract with @minerjones? Are 40k only for review campaign, or can they be used to compensate users if the service turns into scam?

I don't see a problem if the funds from the escrow were used to settle the user, regardless of the fact that it was initially planned for the review campaign. Which, by the way, was finished a long time ago. The problem is that it is difficult to prove how much someone had/tried to withdraw because there is no irrefutable evidence for that. All they have is a letter of guarantee or notes, but that can very easily be forged, which will certainly be tempting to scammers.
Also, after the withdrawal request, the balance going to be 0, so in the event that the escrow gets direct access to the private key, it will not be able to determine the owner and amount of funds with certainty.

I have read, Sir
It's still not work today and I will just wait for more official announcement.

This is not true. You haven't read anything, because if you had, you would know that the unavailability of the Whirlwind website is not the main problem.
Read again, Sir.

We will receive coins back if whirlwind money has given a guarantee on it?
How will it work, Sir?

The problem with the clearnet whirlwind page has been going on for over a month now, and considering your insistence on it, I'm pretty sure you've never used Whirlwind, at least not in the last month.
Why do you act as a victim in this case? Why do you say "We"?

[holydarkness]

[...]
I have read, Sir
It's still not work today and I will just wait for more official announcement.
 
[...]

shasan just reported it doesn't work for him as well:
[...]

As been repetitively informed, their clearnet has been down for a while, their tor version is still up and running though. Charles-Tim already gave you a guide on how to use the tor site from the other thread. If you're still unclear about how to use tor and want to try to access their tor site, I can guide you step by step. But, the current advise for the time being is to refrain from depositing until the pending transactions came through.

[hugeblack]

I don't see a problem if the funds from the escrow were used to settle the user, regardless of the fact that it was initially planned for the review campaign. Which, by the way, was finished a long time ago. The problem is that it is difficult to prove how much someone had/tried to withdraw because there is no irrefutable evidence for that. All they have is a letter of guarantee or notes, but that can very easily be forged, which will certainly be tempting to scammers.
Also, after the withdrawal request, the balance going to be 0, so in the event that the escrow gets direct access to the private key, it will not be able to determine the owner and amount of funds with certainty.

The last time I used WWM was after adding the concept of notes public key, so I don't remember the details of withdrawal, but I think that sending a note private key to minerjones would solve the problem because it was the only way to prove user ownership.

Anyway, I hope they go back, I'll give them 3 more days, maybe they were in Hawaii where there were fires or in Southeast Asia where there was typhoon.
after that it is better to consider what happened as scam and start minimizing the damage as much as possible.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Does anyone know what the terms of the contract with @minerjones? Are 40k only for review campaign, or can they be used to compensate users if the service turns into scam?

I don't see a problem compensating the victims with the fund available in escrow. If a scammer scam someone and if an escrow have the fund then sending back the fund to the scammer will be weird. I am sure a lot of people joined their campaign knowing some $40k funds are in hold and the campaign manager is holding the signature payment.

Is someone considering leaving a negative feedback to Whirlwind's feedback page? Or it is too early to do such thing, may be doing so will let them run away without changing their mind.

One very important concern in the business model was the way they always encouraged people to keep the coins in their platform. All they provided was a private note with some numbers and text string, you can not use publicly to verify balance. Does it sound like a Ponzi scheme?

The idea of the site is unique and their technical background is good, but it seems that they do not have enough liquidity to create a decentralized mixing service. we'll have to wait a long time to see a mixing service with blinded bearer certificates.

In bitcoin when someone is offering you to send them your coin and hold it in their custody, it's always unique LOL
I will never allow a third party to hold even a 100 mbtc for me. Not your key not your coin, very simple.

Regarding technical background, scammers are always smarter than average people or you and would never was scammed.

[FatFork]

I don't see a problem if the funds from the escrow were used to settle the user, regardless of the fact that it was initially planned for the review campaign. Which, by the way, was finished a long time ago. The problem is that it is difficult to prove how much someone had/tried to withdraw because there is no irrefutable evidence for that. All they have is a letter of guarantee or notes, but that can very easily be forged, which will certainly be tempting to scammers.
Also, after the withdrawal request, the balance going to be 0, so in the event that the escrow gets direct access to the private key, it will not be able to determine the owner and amount of funds with certainty.

The last time I used WWM was after adding the concept of notes public key, so I don't remember the details of withdrawal, but I think that sending a note private key to minerjones would solve the problem because it was the only way to prove user ownership.

If nothing has changed since I last used WhirlWind, I believe there are two possible scenarios here that need to be addressed:

1. Users with remaining funds on their notes: To verify this, a potential solution would be to share the private key of the note with a trusted forum member who can verify its contents. This action should be taken promptly while the WhirlWind site is still accessible.

2. Users who requested withdrawals, either in full or partially, from their WhirlWind note to a private wallet: In this scenario, the available balance on the note would either be decreased by the withdrawn amount or down to zero. To prove an unsuccessful withdrawal, affected users should provide a signed message (letter of guarantee) generated by the WhirlWind during the withdrawal request. By comparing the information within the signed message with blockchain transactions, it should be possible to verify the status of the withdrawal and the amount owed.

[examplens]

Is someone considering leaving a negative feedback to Whirlwind's feedback page? Or it is too early to do such thing, may be doing so will let them run away without changing their mind.

Yes, I thought about it, but somehow I wanted to give them an additional deadline compared to what they promised the campaign manager. I take into account some possible unforeseen circumstances, even if this is what hugeblack mentioned.
However, I would encourage decodx as the OP on this topic and one of the potential victims of ww, to create a flag against them. It should be more of a warning and to reduce the damage and potential new victims. I will support such a flag, I will also be happy to withdraw my support if there is a positive resolution to the whole matter.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

However, I would encourage decodx as the OP on this topic and one of the potential victims of ww, to create a flag against them. It should be more of a warning and to reduce the damage and potential new victims. I will support such a flag, I will also be happy to withdraw my support if there is a positive resolution to the whole matter.

I already left a negative feedback after considering the possibility that anyone who is not aware can find themselves deposited their coins and they will have same fate like decodx. If decodx decides to create a flag then I suggest to post the Letter of Guarantee and create the flag. I will have no problem to support it.

[Lucius]

Yes
It really looks like exit scam.
Site is not accessible anymore: http://whirlwind.money/
Really sad news but I've called it earlier when I've sait it's just a matter of time: 

Issue is many services are shady. It's only a question of time until we see an exit scam again or fraud operator like ChipMixer.

It would be better if you don't write anything, than you appear completely ignorant about what happened with CM and what is happening specifically in this case. It is hard to even imagine that you think that CM carried out an exit scam, unless you think that some three letter agencies helped them in this by seizing their domains and servers

[LoyceV]

I'm really open to hearing your thoughts on what my next move should be. What would you do if you were in my shoes? Your opinions are much appreciated!

Is it too late to try this?

My suggestion: Everyone who have fund there in the notes, submit withdrawal [full amount], leave nothing. You will get the Letter of Guarantee. Verify the message. The letter will have withdrawal address and anyone can easily verify that the funds were not received. Do not use this address in the future just in case someone get a chance to tell that you received the funds.

If you can prove your money disappeared, you can create a type 3 Flag. And file a claim: minerjones still has $40k in escrow. I'm curious to see what conditions will have to be fullfilled.

Honestly, I didn't like the whole idea of staking on their platform from the beginning.

That makes two of us:

If the multi-sig balance is 10BTC and you have a Note with a 1BTC balance you will automatically receive 10% of 0.0333BTC every day you keep your Note funded, which is 0.0033BTC a day.

On second thought: this sounds a lot like the many "services" in the past that paid interest on Bitcoin deposits. Usually, that didn't end well.
Are you sure you want to be associated with those?

One very important concern in the business model was the way they always encouraged people to keep the coins in their platform. All they provided was a private note with some numbers and text string, you can not use publicly to verify balance. Does it sound like a Ponzi scheme?

It could be the idea was good, but the lack of users killed it. They wanted 10000 deposits for their "anonymity mining", and reached only 5% of that.

The problem is that it is difficult to prove how much someone had/tried to withdraw because there is no irrefutable evidence for that.

And there's this:

I just (only now) realize that makes the escrow partially useless: if there would be an exit scam, it would be trivially easy to fake losses to claim back the escrow as a victim.

[decodx]

I'm really open to hearing your thoughts on what my next move should be. What would you do if you were in my shoes? Your opinions are much appreciated!

Is it too late to try this?

My suggestion: Everyone who have fund there in the notes, submit withdrawal [full amount], leave nothing. You will get the Letter of Guarantee. Verify the message. The letter will have withdrawal address and anyone can easily verify that the funds were not received. Do not use this address in the future just in case someone get a chance to tell that you received the funds.

If you can prove your money disappeared, you can create a type 3 Flag. And file a claim: minerjones still has $40k in escrow. I'm curious to see what conditions will have to be fullfilled.

Alright, I think I've waited long enough. It's been more than 56 hours since I put in the withdrawal request and over 48 hours since I emailed their support. No response yet. I'm going to take action and initiate a Type 3 flag on the whirlwindmoney account.


Here's all the evidence I've compiled:

Whirlwind note public address: wwLckQCopiVAVuENvCP2M8anGiGJRyitwFK

Deposit LoG:

Code:

<SIGNED MESSAGE>We have generated the deposit address bc1q37jt7syamkvflp5mdkuqwvfgz8j8s59f7n5emh at Mon Aug 14 2023 07:16:50 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) where the minimum deposit is 0.001. You can deposit from Mon Aug 14 2023 07:16:50 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) until Tue Aug 15 2023 07:16:50 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time). Our fee is 0% and 0 BTC per withdraw address. Your Public Address is wwLckQCopiVAVuENvCP2M8anGiGJRyitwFK and you will use the private key (note) of this address which you must have saved to sign withdraw messages in the future. This message was signed using the letter signing address which can be found on our website or at /verification/letter_signing_address on the system's API.</SIGNED MESSAGE>

<SIGNING ADDRESS>1JmCabMgyVZ8zmgaV5JGH7BXe48buVaUUd</SIGNING ADDRESS>

<SIGNATURE>ILeN2rlQFW1GK4AQmGUhINj/ZbflbOFLrB35h7beRcZ7C2jUXjaKvqpMcIFRWMrxRLYm1JLfnzOK5eP8dUbhZFE=</SIGNATURE>

Transaction for my deposit: https://mempool.space/tx/c61edd3d7b828ec0f0fe23432597c42139564ec72534dc09e551f735cb434033

Withdrawal Log:

Code:

<SIGNED MESSAGE>You used credit from your public Public Address wwLckQCopiVAVuENvCP2M8anGiGJRyitwFK on Mon Aug 14 2023 12:15:34 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time). The withdraw address(es) are the following: 1 - bc1qlgawn2pngyf89cpmy24qex7jlj548u6fwm6uzc which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; 2 - bc1qr9rrl034k6undwf09fh377grw7vtka5wpy4w5f which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; 3 - bc1q3unhr4da52lg8ddg86gmmleazgkws2zpl6w4zs which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; 4 - bc1qc3ssucykfsqfzaggsqeg5u7jkecp98re0wh08w which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; This message was signed using the letter signing address which can be found on our website or at /verification/letter_signing_address on the system's API.</SIGNED MESSAGE>

<SIGNING ADDRESS>1JmCabMgyVZ8zmgaV5JGH7BXe48buVaUUd</SIGNING ADDRESS>

<SIGNATURE>H4hJ6/jiU6BKyzqzIdPX4aItpMLJYL/kS+MjumOqThbSL8Z3nCvZWjOcjPS09fy3fEiG6GWPWNGsAC8/CVAuRFw=</SIGNATURE>

Destination address balances (you can check on the blockchain explorer that there were no incoming transactions):
1 -
2 -
3 -
4 -


@minerjones, please let me know if there is anything else I should provide to claim the funds from escrow.


[edit] Type 3 Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3197

[Billo_]

I have read, Sir
It's still not work today and I will just wait for more official announcement.

You haven't read anything, because if you had, you would know that the unavailability of the Whirlwind website is not the main problem.

You are wrong, Sir
I have read it and I have understand it and whirlwind is very problem prone. Many people have yet to receive coins, many can't reach website and many are waiting for official announcement from dev.

Read again, Sir.

I don't need to read again, because I've already read, Sir

We will receive coins back if whirlwind money has given a guarantee on it?
How will it work, Sir?

The problem with the clearnet whirlwind page has been going on for over a month now, and considering your insistence on it, I'm pretty sure you've never used Whirlwind, at least not in the last month.

You are wrong again, Sir
Website was up in June and people could make a deposit.

Why do you act as a victim in this case?

Because we deserve to access our coin rightfully, Sir

Why do you say "We"?

Because many people are are customer, Sir.

Yes
It really looks like exit scam.
Site is not accessible anymore: http://whirlwind.money/
Really sad news but I've called it earlier when I've sait it's just a matter of time: 

Issue is many services are shady. It's only a question of time until we see an exit scam again or fraud operator like ChipMixer.

It would be better if you don't write anything,

It's not your business what I write here, Sir.
Everyone can write post here.

than you appear completely ignorant about what happened with CM and what is happening specifically in this case. It is hard to even imagine that you think that CM carried out an exit scam, unless you think that some three letter agencies helped them in this by seizing their domains and servers

CM clearly breaking internal promise to customer, where CM claimed to delete private data after 7 day.
But we all know, data was not deleted by CM and many private key chips were swept at CM downfall way after 7 days were over after people have been customer at CM.
CM clearly violated promise and has not deleted private key data. 
And we still owe many questions from CM, no CM representative showed up, even not from different account. Can be proven easily by signing a CM Bitcoin public key.
Quit defending CM just because it paid you handsome BTC.

Now, whirlwind really needs to solve issue, Website is still not accessible: http://whirlwind.money/

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

[edit] Type 3 Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3197

You should update the first post with the link of this flag.
Supported.

Few words for the f*ck sake

Who is going to believe that Whirlwind is not aware of what is happening? I doubt they are not. I don't think there are any excuse left for them and this must assure that it was a rug pull eventually. Planned well.

I see the trick was to start with an aggressive approach. Create a situation where others will assume they have wealth to invest in the business and they have better idea and knowledge about privacy.  Ultimate Bitcoin Privacy - Discussion was where all it started to impress some forum members.

Then with this highly paying signature campaign with huge weekly budget, everyone was thinking finally a replacement for Chipmixer signature campaign. They were able to manipulate the entire forum [except few].

Whoever this person was, he knew about the forum very well. He must know a lot of us and how we behave. So he knew where were the holes.

[1.] No business ever wanted to escrow huge money. They saw in some situations few members suggested proof of bankroll [for gambling business though], but they found it useful for them. They sent $40k DAI to minerjones. It made everyone impressed! [The review campaign was a poorly execution though in terms of payment, it was showing you are getting paid huge but at the end you don't even get 1/5th of your expectation. Everyone was thinking they are going to get $100 but I saw many who has done very good job even got $15 to $30, they were unhappy, what a shame. Only I and one other guy got $100 if I am correct. Why I got $100, I know very well, may be some of you too]

[2.] A signature campaign with an unbelievable weekly budget [for a business which just started] to show that they are wealthy enough to market this product.

They figured that with small marketing budget, without showing any aggressiveness, starting just like any other business will not get the business noticed or at-least it will take longer time. There are already some established mixers, Chipmixer left an empty place just few weeks ago so to create a dominance very quickly, the only way was to create a hype around the forum. Show off that they have huge budget. They did well. Everyone thought this is the next Chipmixer who is going to stay in the business for the years to come and going to pay them maximum per week for wearing the signature.

Then this anonymity mining idea. Encourage customers to give them the coins and in return a healthy APR. Everyone started to forget that a business which is not making money, not having cash flow but spending for the last 5 months can not continue like this. It has to stop at some point.

Now it's difficult to assume if this anonymity idea was to collect the coins and rug pull at some point or it was genuine. Even if it was genuine then after continuing it for few months when they only had 500 or some transactions out of 10000 they targeted, they knew it's not going to work. Continuing the business and to reach the target is going to cost them a lot more money than that they already spent. From $6k to $10k weekly marketing budget if they go down to $1k weekly budget then it will lose all credibility of the showing off too.

Result was to let it continue as it is because they were not paying anyone any bitcoin but using the NOTES. Even extending it for one day may get them a good incoming that can boost the multisig wallet a little bit.

My concision:  
[1.] They had plan from the beginning to scam at some point. They knew which direction to take for that. Aggressive marketing, showing off wealth was just part of the plan. [2.] If they had genuine interest to establish the business then this aggressive marketing budget destroyed everything. It's now clear that they were not as rich as they were showing off. They had limited budget for marketing. When you have a limit then you need to spend in that limit or at some point you are empty.

But either way, it's a scam now. The intention is much clear.

I don't think eventually they lost anything. There are enough btc which is higher than the amount they invested[expense]. It's such pathetic that they did not even came to tell some words like we are not able to continue because the business is not in profit or such things. Cowards!

I suggest minerjones to come forward and compensate as much as he can using this $40k DAI. This is not whirlwind's money anymore, it's for the people who lost their hard earned money in this scam. This signature campaigners also need to support the flag and leave negative feedback as they are the main victim, if you are hoping for any miracle, then I am sorry, I do not see any, anymore now.

Sorry for the losses you all had. At least this should be a lesson for everyone. When a brand new business is coming and offering almost 1.5x higher than the ecosystem, then at least think before you give a support to them.

Last few months everywhere it was whirlwind. No one even heard the guy [I can not find his username] who was seeking help that he lost his money and whirlwind didn't even bothered to reply his email.

[LoyceV]

Withdrawal Log:

Code:

<SIGNED MESSAGE>You used credit from your public Public Address wwLckQCopiVAVuENvCP2M8anGiGJRyitwFK on Mon Aug 14 2023 12:15:34 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time). The withdraw address(es) are the following: 1 - bc1qlgawn2pngyf89cpmy24qex7jlj548u6fwm6uzc which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; 2 - bc1qr9rrl034k6undwf09fh377grw7vtka5wpy4w5f which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; 3 - bc1q3unhr4da52lg8ddg86gmmleazgkws2zpl6w4zs which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; 4 - bc1qc3ssucykfsqfzaggsqeg5u7jkecp98re0wh08w which will receive 0.001 BTC 0 hours in the future. ; This message was signed using the letter signing address which can be found on our website or at /verification/letter_signing_address on the system's API.</SIGNED MESSAGE>

<SIGNING ADDRESS>1JmCabMgyVZ8zmgaV5JGH7BXe48buVaUUd</SIGNING ADDRESS>

<SIGNATURE>H4hJ6/jiU6BKyzqzIdPX4aItpMLJYL/kS+MjumOqThbSL8Z3nCvZWjOcjPS09fy3fEiG6GWPWNGsAC8/CVAuRFw=</SIGNATURE>

This is all you need to prove you were scammed.
I verified the signed message, and confirm the address belongs to the site:

Signing Address: 1JmCabMgyVZ8zmgaV5JGH7BXe48buVaUUd

Scam confirmed!

My guess: they abandoned the project due to the lack of users, but kept it open for deposits. It's an exit scam by the book.

Result was to let it continue as it is because they were not paying anyone any bitcoin but using the NOTES.

Now that you mention it: Do signature campaigns that pay in "IOUs" even belong on the Services board? Or should they be moved to the Altcoin board?

[1.] They had plan from the beginning to scam at some point.

I think they were hoping to make big profits, and if something is profitable, there's no need to scam. We've seen it with casinos too: fake it, then either make it, or break it and walk away.

[NotATether]

Result was to let it continue as it is because they were not paying anyone any bitcoin but using the NOTES.

Now that you mention it: Do signature campaigns that pay in "IOUs" even belong on the Services board? Or should they be moved to the Altcoin board?

They will likely stay in the Services board as long as its denominated in Bitcoin, just like the casino sig campaigns that pay the BTC in your gambling account.

I don't know about you, but I think the whole idea of paying users in notes was kind of risky, in case they didn't work, and I guess now we see why; because they depend on the operator's presence to redeem.

[LoyceV]

I don't know about you, but I think the whole idea of paying users in notes was kind of risky, in case they didn't work, and I guess now we see why; because they depend on the operator's presence to redeem.

After the discussion about privacy for campaign participants, it made sense. There's a risk involved, but that's the same risk they advertised for others in their signature. It forced the campaign participants to "put their money where their mouth is".

[Poker Player]

Now that you mention it: Do signature campaigns that pay in "IOUs" even belong on the Services board? Or should they be moved to the Altcoin board?

They will likely stay in the Services board as long as its denominated in Bitcoin, just like the casino sig campaigns that pay the BTC in your gambling account.

I believe that what LoyceV raises is legitimate. If they should move to the Altcoin board, and it seems to me that they should if we respect the philosophy of this forum. Both mixers that pay you in notes or similar, and casinos that pay you in the casino account, which is the first thing I thought of as well.

Not your keys not your coins.

[JollyGood]

Looking back now it was risky. Another aspect of Notes was that you could transfer one balance to another note in entirety but you could not withdraw funds in entirety. For example, after withdrawing the previous balance (which was never paid), I was still left with around $8 which was too small for it to be processed. Those small amounts from signature campaign participants would have added up to be a worthwhile amount eventually.

I don't know about you, but I think the whole idea of paying users in notes was kind of risky, in case they didn't work, and I guess now we see why; because they depend on the operator's presence to redeem.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Result was to let it continue as it is because they were not paying anyone any bitcoin but using the NOTES.

Now that you mention it: Do signature campaigns that pay in "IOUs" even belong on the Services board? Or should they be moved to the Altcoin board?

[1.] They had plan from the beginning to scam at some point.

I think they were hoping to make big profits, and if something is profitable, there's no need to scam. We've seen it with casinos too: fake it, then either make it, or break it and walk away.

You have a point and interestingly no one thought about it until now LOL
But it's now pointless. The signature campaign is dead until we have a miracle and it become active again. In that case reporting the thread and letting it mods to decide is the best.

[fillippone]

I don't know about you, but I think the whole idea of paying users in notes was kind of risky, in case they didn't work, and I guess now we see why; because they depend on the operator's presence to redeem.

After the discussion about privacy for campaign participants, it made sense. There's a risk involved, but that's the same risk they advertised for others in their signature. It forced the campaign participants to "put their money where their mouth is".

I participated in a few campaign where the payout was paid in the advertised service. I never had a problem with that and I was used to keep the stash on that for this exact reason. Of course I had a small fortune in WW, but it is another lesson learned.

[notblox1]

I will support flag against them, but I still have small hope they will return coins, and they still have time to fix damages they made.

Now that you mention it: Do signature campaigns that pay in "IOUs" even belong on the Services board? Or should they be moved to the Altcoin board?

I think campaign manager should be responsible for supporting this.
I dont know who came up with that stupid idea to pay campaign participants with worthless IOU notes, but this only helped whirlwind exit scam easier.
Is there any way for members to get paid for their loses if they can prove they have coins stuck in whirlwind?

I participated in a few campaign where the payout was paid in the advertised service. I never had a problem with that and I was used to keep the stash on that for this exact reason. Of course I had a small fortune in WW, but it is another lesson learned.

Did you send your own coins or it was from payments in signature campaign?
I hope you can get refunded for your loses.

[fillippone]

I will support flag against them, but I still have small hope they will return coins, and they still have time to fix damages they made.

Now that you mention it: Do signature campaigns that pay in "IOUs" even belong on the Services board? Or should they be moved to the Altcoin board?

I think campaign manager should be responsible for supporting this.
I dont know who came up with that stupid idea to pay campaign participants with worthless IOU notes, but this only helped whirlwind exit scam easier.
Is there any way for members to get paid for their loses if they can prove they have coins stuck in whirlwind?

I participated in a few campaign where the payout was paid in the advertised service. I never had a problem with that and I was used to keep the stash on that for this exact reason. Of course I had a small fortune in WW, but it is another lesson learned.

Did you send your own coins or it was from payments in signature campaign?
I hope you can get refunded for your loses.

I tested the service indipendently and it worked. I was holding my campaign rewards on the website, and just when I ended the campaign all the drama started. Horrible timing.

[holydarkness]

[...]
Is there any way for members to get paid for their loses if they can prove they have coins stuck in whirlwind?
[...]

There's an ongoing discussion on their ANN about considering using funds escrowed by MJ to compensate what's lost by this... incident, but I think [if the idea is approved] the priority should be compensate those who deposited on whirlwind first, and later on to the campaign participants

[notblox1]

There's an ongoing discussion on their ANN about considering using funds escrowed by MJ to compensate what's lost by this... incident, but I think [if the idea is approved] the priority should be compensate those who deposited on whirlwind first, and later on to the campaign participants

No, I dont think so.
First people who need to get refunded is campaign participants because they received payments from manager in IOU notes against their will.
I am sure most of them would choose to get paid directly in Bitcoin and later deposit to earn more rewards if they want.
People who sent their own money for mixing did it on their own risk, but everyone needs to get refunded if possible.

I tested the service indipendently and it worked. I was holding my campaign rewards on the website, and just when I ended the campaign all the drama started. Horrible timing.

After what happened to whirlwind and chipmixer I will think very good before advertising any mixer in my signature.

[Rikafip]

I was holding my campaign rewards on the website, and just when I ended the campaign all the drama started. Horrible timing.

You didn't withdraw any of your ww signature campaign earnings? Damn, and I thought me holding 5 weeks of signature campaign money (+last week's earning that no one can withdraw) was a bad move...

I am sure most of them would choose to get paid directly in Bitcoin and later deposit to earn more rewards if they want.

Of course we would choose getting the money directly into our own wallets instead this note system.

[fillippone]

I was holding my campaign rewards on the website, and just when I ended the campaign all the drama started. Horrible timing.

You didn't withdraw any of your ww signature campaign earnings? Damn, and I thought me holding 5 weeks of signature campaign money (+last week's earning that no one can withdraw) was a bad move...

I did once, but I had some good money there. As I said I tested the system and it worked flawlessy.

Also, I had faith in the campaign manager.

This is something that I should be more careful about in the future: as I cannot claim Hhampuz responsible for anything, also I cannot think WW we're to be trusted because it has a campaign managed by Hhampuz.

[notblox1]

You didn't withdraw any of your ww signature campaign earnings? Damn, and I thought me holding 5 weeks of signature campaign money (+last week's earning that no one can withdraw) was a bad move...

6 weeks is not huge amount of money for most people but I bet it still hurts to get screwed like this.
This is worse than having your money stuck in exchange or gambling website.

Of course we would choose getting the money directly into our own wallets instead this note system.

When was this IOU notes change introduced and why nobody complained to campaign manager?

Also, I had faith in the campaign manager.

This is something that I should be more careful about in the future: as I cannot claim Hhampuz responsible for anything, also I cannot think WW we're to be trusted because it has a campaign managed by Hhampuz.

This is the main problem and main reason why people trusted this service more.
When my money was confiscated from one gambling website, that same manager defended them and refused to stay on my side, and I have nothing personal against him.
Lesson learned for all of us.

[Rikafip]

I did once, but I had some good money there.

Well, at least you didn't lose everything as I initially understood from your post.


@Hhampuz when you talked to them the other day, did you explain that unless they come and sort these issues out asap they will be seen as a scam as that's exactly what is happening now and that is not something that is easy to recover from considering their line of business. If you indeed explained them consequences and they decided to ignore it...

When was this IOU notes change introduced and why nobody complained to campaign manager?

I can't remember when exactly, but I personally didn't complain because those were the terms of the campaign so if you don't like it, what you can do is to leave the campaign (I doubt that there would be exceptions for those who complained) and on top of that I've been in a campaign before where I wasn't paid directly to my wallet (Bustadice) and never had any issues. Lesson learned I guess.

[jokers10]

No, I dont think so.
First people who need to get refunded is campaign participants because they received payments from manager in IOU notes against their will.
I am sure most of them would choose to get paid directly in Bitcoin and later deposit to earn more rewards if they want.
People who sent their own money for mixing did it on their own risk, but everyone needs to get refunded if possible.

When you take part in some campaign you agree with its rules or not participate. So it's incorrect saying that way of receiving payments was against the will of participants. If it was just made only now, then it could be discussible, but it was for weeks, everyone who didn't want to risk could exit campaign for that time.

I hope there's less losses than deposited at escrow and everyone will get refunds, but first I guess we should find out how many are at a loss for a decision to be as fair as possible.

@Hhampuz when you talked to them the other day, did you explain that unless they come and sort these issues out asap they will be seen as a scam as that's exactly what is happening now and that is not something that is easy to recover from considering their line of business. If you indeed explained them consequences and they decided to ignore it...

If they don't understand that by themselves, they have very few chances on restoring reputation. They still can try to solve all problems with payments, but their type of service means they need a deep trust from users... and who will trust to deposit bitcoins to their Notes now?

[Hhampuz]

@Hhampuz when you talked to them the other day, did you explain that unless they come and sort these issues out asap they will be seen as a scam as that's exactly what is happening now and that is not something that is easy to recover from considering their line of business. If you indeed explained them consequences and they decided to ignore it...

Yes. I mentioned the unrest here, together with the scam accusations starting to brew.

[hugeblack]

Whoever this person was, he knew about the forum very well. He must know a lot of us and how we behave. So he knew where were the holes.

I started to believe this, in the past I did not think that he was a scam because the account was created before March 15 (the date of CM seizure), he has a technical background, in the first there was fast mode and note mode where it was not easy to scam users with fast mode and if scam with note mode they have 40k as a guarantee, and then talk about the fact that the service is decentralized.

There were indications that they did not have a large budget, such as spending on campaign signatures was less over time.


This reminds me of a mixing service that had money in bitcointalk escrow and suddenly pulled out before exit scam.

6 weeks is not huge amount of money for most people but I bet it still hurts to get screwed like this.
This is worse than having your money stuck in exchange or gambling website.

If this is true, then I think that 12% made them promote the service almost for free, as I think that most of the participants did not withdraw their currencies, but on the contrary, some may be greedy to deposit more.


Flag supported with negative trust.

[notblox1]

I can't remember when exactly, but I personally didn't complain because those were the terms of the campaign so if you don't like it, what you can do is to leave the campaign (I doubt that there would be expection for those who complained) and on top of that I've been in a campaign before where I wasn't paid directly to my wallet (Bustadice) and never had any issues. Lesson learned I guess.

If everyone or majority of members complained than it would not be possible for anyone to force this changes.
All participant share small responsibility for keeping quiet, and I would not agree on this terms myself if I was in that position.
But it is easy for me to be general now when battle is over  
I wish luck to everyone and I hope you get back coins you earned fair.

[Rikafip]

Yes. I mentioned the unrest here, together with the scam accusations starting to brew.

If that didn't persuade them to do something, then indeed we can talk about exit scam here. Someone who intends to continue business here would do everything in his power to sort the issues asap and not leave it like this.

If everyone or majority of members complained than it would not be possible for anyone to force this changes.

Maybe, if we all said no to the notes. Or we would be replaced with those that would be willing to get paid that way as not getting paid directly is not something unusual here and its been done many times before.

and I would not agree on this terms myself if I was in that position.

The fact that no one (afaik) left campaign after notes introduction says a lot.  

[notblox1]

When you take part in some campaign you agree with its rules or not participate. So it's incorrect saying that way of receiving payments was against the will of participants. If it was just made only now, then it could be discussible, but it was for weeks, everyone who didn't want to risk could exit campaign for that time.

You just decided to write something smart right? Before reading carefully what other people wrote 
This campaign didnt start with paying IOU notes from start, this was later changed and I dont know by whos initiative and what was the reason for doing this.

If this is true, then I think that 12% made them promote the service almost for free, as I think that most of the participants did not withdraw their currencies, but on the contrary, some may be greedy to deposit more.

I dont know if there is any way to prove this theory, but it is possible.
This is all done by stealing money from other people.

The fact that no one (afaik) left campaign after notes introduction says a lot. 

Some members left campaign recently, maybe they had a feeling something is not right.

[TryNinja]

This campaign didnt start with paying IOU notes from start, this was later changed and I dont know by whos initiative and what was the reason for doing this.

My reply on the other thread:

I don’t remember if I praised the change, but I did understand the reason for that. More money going around their multisig address = more privacy for everyone else, specially their customers. Assuming they were legit and not premeditating an exit scam, it was a smart move.

Let’s all remember that everyone could withdraw at any time, week after week, meaning that if you were to withdraw the next day after every payout, you would only have lost this week’s (last) payout.

Some members left campaign recently, maybe they had a feeling something is not right.

I was one of those members. I doubt anyone left because they were feeling a scam… most, myself included, moved to MixTum because they had a better deal.

[jokers10]

When you take part in some campaign you agree with its rules or not participate. So it's incorrect saying that way of receiving payments was against the will of participants. If it was just made only now, then it could be discussible, but it was for weeks, everyone who didn't want to risk could exit campaign for that time.

You just decided to write something smart right? Before reading carefully what other people wrote 
This campaign didnt start with paying IOU notes from start, this was later changed and I dont know by whos initiative and what was the reason for doing this.

If I suppose that you have a habit of reading carefully what other people write before answering them, it looks strange that you didn't take into account that I never said that these rules were from the beginning and I said that participants had several weeks to leave the campaign. But, well, we'll not change the topic on talking about each others intentions or qualities, right?

When you take part in campaign you know that rules can be changed and you can accept new rules or leave that campaign. Having new rules for weeks, it is incorrect to say that it became surprising for participants just now.

You mixed up the authorship of the last quote.

[Synchronice]

snip

I disagree with you. Aggressive marketing is just a type of marketing that works very well in a short timeframe and gives a huge boost to brand's awareness. Logically, every new service should come up with aggressive marketing at first, otherwise they won't become famous anytime soon. Since you mentioned Chipmixer, I spend an hour to learn them a little and as I see, they absolutely started on this forum with an aggressive marketing. They also came up when one of the most famous mixer left the market. So, Chipmixer took an advantage of the moment of Bitmixer leaving the market, then they came here with a review campaign and started a signature campaign with pretty good pay rates, hired a lot of participants, kept the fixed bitcoin payrate when it was going up and up. They were paying hundreds of thousands of dollars per week. Chipmixer was no joke, I can't compare Whirlwind to them. Don't know much about other signature campaigns but I bet there must be many companies that did aggressive marketing and still operate on this forum. Probably Stake? Idk.

I think the situation for whirlwind was the following: They had two plans, either stay on the business or if it wasn't going to become profitable, then just exit. I believe their intention was not to scam when they decided to start this business but as it seems, their plan didn't work, the money that they were putting into campaign didn't bring back enough profit. But I don't know why did they left $40k in escrow with minerjones.

[LoyceV]

But I don't know why did they left $40k in escrow with minerjones.

They agreed to a 7 day delay. They couldn't withdraw from escrow to pull an exit scam.

[Lillominato89]

I'm only reading now that whirlwind turned out to be a scam! I honestly never expected it, the platform worked perfectly as long as I too was part of the whirlwind signature campaign. fortunately I have always withdrawn everything I could because I prefer to keep everything in my pocket and I don't blame those who wanted to leave the funds on the WW website, 12% is tempting for everyone! I support the flag as a sign of proximity to the forum members affected by the scam

[coupable]

This isn't a scam accusation (at least not yet), but a heads-up for the community. Taking everything into account, I believe it's in everyone's best interest to hold off on using the service for the time being. It would be wise to wait until we get some feedback from their representatives and the service gets back on track. I'll keep this thread updated as the situation progresses.

I would like to thank you for your position in support of the community and your understanding of the circumstances surrounding the entire situation, since we do not yet have sufficient information about the reasons for what is happening, especially the secret of the sudden disappearance of the stuff team without any prior notification or explanation.
The most dangerous point in this mode is that it gives an opportunity for scammers to create fake copies of the mixer and claim that it is back in action. Therefore, I advise everyone not to use Whirlwind services for a period after it has restored its activity (if this happens) and wait for the reviews.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

snip

I disagree with you. Aggressive marketing is just a type of marketing that works very well in a short timeframe and gives a huge boost to brand's awareness. Logically, every new service should come up with aggressive marketing at first, otherwise they won't become famous anytime soon.

Consider you have $100k marketing budget and considering how the signature campaign works [it takes time to receive ROI for many reasons], you thought to spend $10k per week. You are going to stay in the competition for only 10 weeks. What happen you have no result in these 10 weeks? You are out of budget. You have no money left for the 11th week.

But if you were cool enough and knew your limit then started with even a $2k weekly budget, you could continue for nearly a year [50 weeks]. In these 50 weeks combining with any other promotions you could receive far more better result and your business could survive [in a year time, still you were not able to have a result then it is obvious that your product is not good enough for people]. So which method you think is better?

Aggressive marketing does not mean you run out of budget very quickly then kill the project. Without marketing your business has zero visibility.

I can not remember exactly how much Chipmixer was paying when they first launched their campaign.

[NotATether]

I can not remember exactly how much Chipmixer was paying when they first launched their campaign.

Up to 0.0375BTC per week (which translates to 0.00075BTC per post) until late 2021 bullrun when Bitcoin price became crazy, then it was up to $300/week after that until they were seized.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

I can not remember exactly how much Chipmixer was paying when they first launched their campaign.

Up to 0.0375BTC per week (which translates to 0.00075BTC per post) until late 2021 bullrun when Bitcoin price became crazy, then it was up to $300/week after that until they were seized.

If I can remember correctly, first few weeks it was somewhere a round figure per posts. Consider my memory is serving correct then it was 0.0007 per post. At that time bitcoin price was around only $2,000 to $2,200.

snip

I disagree with you. Aggressive marketing is just a type of marketing that works very well in a short timeframe and gives a huge boost to brand's awareness. Logically, every new service should come up with aggressive marketing at first, otherwise they won't become famous anytime soon.

@Synchronice  what do you think now?

Later they increased the rate and it was 0.00075 until they changed it to $6 when bitcoin price was $30k more and above.

In late 2017 and early 2018 when Bitcoin price was $19,000 to $20,000 only for few weeks, then 0.00075 per posts was a lot but imagine how much bitcoin they already had when they started? The price was even below $1k when they were creating the mixer. They already had enough bitcoin to cover the marketing expense that was calculating in dollar.

Chipmixer was never aggressive. Their growth was steady and normal.

[Synchronice]

snip

I disagree with you. Aggressive marketing is just a type of marketing that works very well in a short timeframe and gives a huge boost to brand's awareness. Logically, every new service should come up with aggressive marketing at first, otherwise they won't become famous anytime soon.

@Synchronice  what do you think now?

Later they increased the rate and it was 0.00075 until they changed it to $6 when bitcoin price was $30k more and above.

In late 2017 and early 2018 when Bitcoin price was $19,000 to $20,000 only for few weeks, then 0.00075 per posts was a lot but imagine how much bitcoin they already had when they started? The price was even below $1k when they were creating the mixer. They already had enough bitcoin to cover the marketing expense that was calculating in dollar.

Chipmixer was never aggressive. Their growth was steady and normal.

Right now all I think about is that Chipmixer paid up to 731 BTC and even if we calculate all of their spending in USD value at the time of transaction, it still looks like they paid millions of dollars . I mean, what crazy amount of money were they earning to afford pay that much? Or what was the benefit they were getting each week from bitcointalk signature campaign? Hands down, I'm just left without words.

There is a big competition on the market. You have Sinbad, Yomix and Mixtum as a competitors who try to catch chipmixer participants and promote their business through them because Chipmixer had very high quality posters. Even me, as a newbie noticed that everyone who was wearing Chipmixer signature and Foxpup avatar, was always posting genuine posts and over time, I even remembered half of Chipmixer participants and when I see a nickname, I know that some of them were in their sig campaign.
So, when you see that chipmixer is gone but the appetite of Chipmixer signature promoters is very high and there you have other competitors who are ready to increase rates in order to get high quality posters, then you have no other choice but to do an aggressive marketing.

[Rikafip]

They agreed to a 7 day delay. They couldn't withdraw from escrow to pull an exit scam.

If they decided to leave those 40k, wouldn't that mean that people deposited more than that + what sig campaign members didn't withdraw? If not, then it would make more sense to pay out everyone what is owed and take that 40k.

[fillippone]

But I don't know why did they left $40k in escrow with minerjones.

They agreed to a 7 day delay. They couldn't withdraw from escrow to pull an exit scam.

Maybe it’s too early to do this kind of speculation, as I still haven’t received my amounts from MinerJones, but provided that he doesn’t scam (sorry for even thinking about this)
I am trying to figure out what we could have learned from this.

Shall a signature wearer not use the service he was advertising (namely: transfer any amount out of it asap because of NYKNYC)?
Shall a signature wearer use the service and be fully accountable, in a harsh way, for any losses?
Maybe a new "standard" of a reputable escrow should be initiated for any sig campaign? This has obvious implications for anyone willing to start a new one for the associated cost. And also maybe for the escrow.

[Synchronice]

But I don't know why did they left $40k in escrow with minerjones.

They agreed to a 7 day delay. They couldn't withdraw from escrow to pull an exit scam.

Maybe it’s too early to do this kind of speculation, as I still haven’t received my amounts from MinerJones, but provided that he doesn’t scam (sorry for even thinking about this)
I am trying to figure out what we could have learned from this.

Shall a signature wearer not use the service he was advertising (namely: transfer any amount out of it asap because of NYKNYC)?
Shall a signature wearer use the service and be fully accountable, in a harsh way, for any losses?
Maybe a new "standard" of a reputable escrow should be initiated for any sig campaign? This has obvious implications for anyone willing to start a new one for the associated cost. And also maybe for the escrow.

There should be some amount of money in escrow, a quantity that will be enough to cover one week, like Royse does.
It's 100% up to you and it's also a personal choice whether you leave funds in the service you advertise, or not. You shouldn't promote business by saying that I don't leave funds in this service because of not your keys, not your coins. This is not a business deal, such an advertisement will only negatively affect the business and there won't be any purpose to hire you if you do anti-marketing.

[examplens]

Some members left campaign recently, maybe they had a feeling something is not right.

I was one of those members. I doubt anyone left because they were feeling a scam… most, myself included, moved to MixTum because they had a better deal.

If I understood correctly, I think that GazetaBitcoin left the campaign solely because of dissatisfaction with the work of Whirlwind. Lack of communication and unclear staking calculations as a main problems. Not because of moving to a better-paid campaign.


Can someone confirm what "Anonymity set, 572user deposits" means?
Does this mean that currently, 572 users (addresses) have a deposit there? As far as I can see, the last deposit was 4 days ago, does that mean that nobody has used this mixer since then?

[jokers10]

Can someone confirm what "Anonymity set, 572user deposits" means?
Does this mean that currently, 572 users (addresses) have a deposit there? As far as I can see, the last deposit was 4 days ago, does that mean that nobody has used this mixer since then?

We can only assume so. This is a centralized service so all numbers it shows are numbers which owners of this service want to be shown. They can still get deposits and switch off the counter. So we can only assume that this number shows an actual amount of deposits in the system as it was explained by service representative. If it is true or if there are less or more active deposits, we can't be sure.

Some people said here they tried to withdraw their funds. And we don't know if their deposits still counted or not, even if a system still works and does it correctly as it was described.

So we can suppose that there are about "Anonymity set" number of active deposits, but we can't be sure.

[Rikafip]

Can someone confirm what "Anonymity set, 572user deposits" means?
Does this mean that currently, 572 users (addresses) have a deposit there? As far as I can see, the last deposit was 4 days ago, does that mean that nobody has used this mixer since then?

I always thought that number was the amount of deposits made so far and not that 572 users have deposits there.

[jokers10]

Can someone confirm what "Anonymity set, 572user deposits" means?
Does this mean that currently, 572 users (addresses) have a deposit there? As far as I can see, the last deposit was 4 days ago, does that mean that nobody has used this mixer since then?

I always thought that number was the amount of deposits made so far and not that 572 users have deposits there.

Yeap, another dimension of counting. As it was stated, it is a number of different addresses from which mixed bitcoins can be got. So you are right, we can't be sure that it is a number of active deposits. It can be probably an amount of made deposits, but it is not for sure.

[GazetaBitcoin]

If I understood correctly, I think that GazetaBitcoin left the campaign solely because of dissatisfaction with the work of Whirlwind. Lack of communication and unclear staking calculations as a main problems. Not because of moving to a better-paid campaign.

Actually no, things did not happen like that... By pure chance, I found a better opportunity at that moment and, by pure chance, it coincided with the moment when WW started to be exposed here... I was deceptioned, indeed, by the fact that they stopped replying to my emails for more than a month; by the fact that I had some days when the daily reward was not paid anymore (not even later through a compensation); and by the fact that they never came with that report I requested for the period of May 17th - June 14th, in order to check in how many of those days I actually received the reward.

So in all this context I was also looking for a better opportunity for renting my signature. It was only the chance that I left the campaign in the day of the penultimate payment made by Hhampuz. So when he made the last payment (2 days ago) I was out from the campaign for a week already.

[TryNinja]

Can someone confirm what "Anonymity set, 572user deposits" means?
Does this mean that currently, 572 users (addresses) have a deposit there? As far as I can see, the last deposit was 4 days ago, does that mean that nobody has used this mixer since then?

It theoretically means that they received a total of 572 deposits in their lifetime. Every new deposit = a new set. The number only goes up, so it doesn’t represente the “active deposits” since a withdrawal isn’t reflected in there.

Of course they could change the number at any time and even hide new deposits since every deposit goes to a brand new wallet.

It’s all speculation, but if they really decided to exit scam and leave the $40k behind, there is a chance someone deposited a big amount and they just unplugged everything to keep the coins. Remember that coins from big hacks and exploits were being mixed on CM, so there is a chance someone stole a couple mills and tried to mix them through whirlwind. (Pure speculation)

[decodx]

Yes. I mentioned the unrest here, together with the scam accusations starting to brew.

If that didn't persuade them to do something, then indeed we can talk about exit scam here. Someone who intends to continue business here would do everything in his power to sort the issues asap and not leave it like this.

I messaged them both through email and PM (those were the only ways I could reach out). However, they ignored all of my attempts at contact. Following that, I started this topic as a heads-up for the community and patiently waited for their reply. It was only when they didn't come through with the update they promised while talking to Hhampuz, and after another day had gone by, that I decided to create a flag and give them a negative tag. So yeah, they had plenty of time to say something, especially since they were chatting with the campaign manager in the meantime.

Can someone confirm what "Anonymity set, 572user deposits" means?
Does this mean that currently, 572 users (addresses) have a deposit there? As far as I can see, the last deposit was 4 days ago, does that mean that nobody has used this mixer since then?

That last deposit from four days ago was mine (unfortunately), and indeed, the counter increased by one after that. I am deposit number 572.

[hugeblack]

It’s all speculation, but if they really decided to exit scam and leave the $40k behind, there is a chance someone deposited a big amount and they just unplugged everything to keep the coins. Remember that coins from big hacks and exploits were being mixed on CM, so there is a chance someone stole a couple mills and tried to mix them through whirlwind. (Pure speculation)

Discussions about the mixing service started on August 9th and so far there is no warning that there are problems with the withdrawal, @sam00 was the first one to report about withdrawal problems and from that date the number of people who deposited is very small although there was no warning about withdrawals problems on WWM (and still).

this means that Promotion of the service was not enough, and until now, unlike the members of the signatory campaign (most of whom did not make withdrawals), no one reported about loss.

I seriously began to think WWM was dead for a while and their budget was limited for about 3-4 months, so I believe that scam is about 3 bitcoins or less than half a million dollars.
The thing I didn't understand was why they didn't ask to withdraw the $40,000 a while ago?

[notblox1]

I was one of those members. I doubt anyone left because they were feeling a scam… most, myself included, moved to MixTum because they had a better deal.

I hope this turns out better for you, but it is another mixer so be careful 

If they decided to leave those 40k, wouldn't that mean that people deposited more than that + what sig campaign members didn't withdraw? If not, then it would make more sense to pay out everyone what is owed and take that 40k.

I dont think they planed exit scam from start, but things didnt go exactly how they expected and they didnt have enough patients to wait.
It is naive to think that any business can be profitable and gain huge popularity in anything in few months up to a year.
And who knows, maybe they do come back at some point, that would be interesting to see.

I was deceptioned, indeed, by the fact that they stopped replying to my emails for more than a month; by the fact that I had some days when the daily reward was not paid anymore (not even later through a compensation); and by the fact that they never came with that report I requested for the period of May 17th - June 14th, in order to check in how many of those days I actually received the reward.

Strange how only a few people noticed they simply vanished from forum several months ago.
This is first alarm that something is not right, than email reply problems, rewards, and now nothing works except depositing.

[LoyceV]

They agreed to a 7 day delay. They couldn't withdraw from escrow to pull an exit scam.

If they decided to leave those 40k, wouldn't that mean that people deposited more than that + what sig campaign members didn't withdraw?

That would be my guess. But we can't know for sure how much was deposited by themselves, and how much came from customers.

I am trying to figure out what we could have learned from this.

Shall a signature wearer not use the service he was advertising (namely: transfer any amount out of it asap because of NYKNYC)?
Shall a signature wearer use the service and be fully accountable, in a harsh way, for any losses?

It starts by not advertising a service you don't trust. And if you do trust it, you can just use it. Why would you recommend others to use something you wouldn't trust with your own money?

Maybe a new "standard" of a reputable escrow should be initiated for any sig campaign? This has obvious implications for anyone willing to start a new one for the associated cost. And also maybe for the escrow.

That's up to each campaign, and between the campaign and it's participants. As long as people are willing to join, there's no reason for them to change anything.

[notblox1]

It starts by not advertising a service you don't trust. And if you do trust it, you can just use it. Why would you recommend others to use something you wouldn't trust with your own money?

LoyceV, are you using Agora Desk exchange? 
In perfect situation it would be best to advertise only services we use, but that is not happening always.
I dont think this is happening in real world outside bitcointalk, people advertise lot of junk all the time because someone pays them to make youtube video for that product ot service.

I hear that manager who managed whirlwind campaign quickly refunded loses to bitcointalk members who participated in campaign, well done.
decodx is there any chance for you to get your coins back?

[LoyceV]

It starts by not advertising a service you don't trust. And if you do trust it, you can just use it. Why would you recommend others to use something you wouldn't trust with your own money?

LoyceV, are you using Agora Desk exchange?  

I don't have a need to exchange funds, so that wouldn't make sense. But I haven't seen a reason not to trust them.
I know this isn't perfect, and the signs weren't that obvious in WWM's case either. But there are many more obvious cases that are still being advertised in signature campaigns, which is the reason I wrote that.

I dont think this is happening in real world outside bitcointalk, people advertise lot of junk all the time because someone pays them to make youtube video for that product ot service.

Not only on Youtube, it's totally normal on TV, internet and in newspapers too. Only when some scandal hits the media, they suddenly start a boycot to rescue their image use the free publicity. Other than that, it's all about the money.
But newspapers don't need to keep much of an image. I like to think we could be different.

You mean that you never sell or buy bitcoin? 

Not P2P I'll stop being off-topic here.

[notblox1]

I don't have a need to exchange funds, so that wouldn't make sense. But I haven't seen a reason not to trust them.

You mean that you never sell or buy bitcoin? 

Not only on Youtube, it's totally normal on TV, internet and in newspapers too. Only when some scandal hits the media, they suddenly start a boycot to rescue their image use the free publicity. Other than that, it's all about the money.
But newspapers don't need to keep much of an image. I like to think we could be different.

I just gave one example of youtube but I know advertising scheme is the same everywhere, maybe they only target different customers.
Companies in bitcointalk forum are targeting people who use bitcoin, but we never know who can turn into scam or they just shutdown business without explanation.
In recent months first it was betnomi casino and now whirlwind. 
 

[fillippone]

It starts by not advertising a service you don't trust. And if you do trust it, you can just use it. Why would you recommend others to use something you wouldn't trust with your own money?

Makes sense. For this reason I used and tested the service myself a few times mixing my own sats. Also for this reason I didn’t rush to withdraw all my weekly signature gains. I left those in the “mining campaign”, and not only for the 12%, but just because I wanted to “believe” in the service I was advertising.

I tend to believe in the services I advertise, this is my rule. Even if I think signature wearer have by no mean any responsibility if the advertised service turns out to be fraudulent.

[Nwada001]

Makes sense. For this reason I used and tested the service myself a few times mixing my own sats. Also for this reason I didn’t rush to withdraw all my weekly signature gains. I left those in the “mining campaign”, and not only for the 12%, but just because I wanted to “believe” in the service I was advertising.

I tend to believe in the services I advertise, this is my rule. Even if I think signature wearer have by no mean any responsibility if the advertised service turns out to be fraudulent.

To some point, I believe, one just needs to test the service of what they are advitizing, even if it's not made compulsory out of their own will, as it will go a long way at least if a question is being raised upon the project on one's signature, the person can be able to explain properly if it works.

I was a victim of such a case where, when I was part of the campaign on the Full-member rank, I tumbled upon a thread that was talking about Mixers. When I dropped my explanation based on what I believed it was, I was corrected by a member of the forum, and the statement ended with "It even know about what you are advertising." That was when I took it upon myself to test the service myself to know how things worked.

This was before the 12% APR was added as part of the feature, and lucky for me, I don't have any funds in there. as the aim of using it was just to test the service mixing and withdrawal procedures.

[fillippone]

To some point, I believe, one just needs to test the service of what they are advitizing, even if it's not made compulsory out of their own will, as it will go a long way at least if a question is being raised upon the project on one's signature, the person can be able to explain properly if it works.

This.
Wearing a signature doesn’t imply full endorsement of the underlying service, or makes the wearer part of the support team, but I guess every signature bearer should have a basic understanding of the service they are advertising, with a minimal idea of the peculiar feature.

[DireWolfM14]

Wearing a signature doesn’t imply full endorsement of the underlying service,

Sorry man, but this sounds like gas-lighting and deflection.  To be honest, I don't care.  You can use whatever logic or philosophical gymnastics you want to excuse and justify the signature you wear, that's not my point.  I've worn signatures for two mixing services so far during my tenure here, both ended up shutting down due to seizures or fear of such.  I've yet to advertise any scams thankfully, but in retrospect, how could I have known before hand?  The truth of the matter is that any centralized mixing service is shady by design, and needs to be if the operators are to maintain their own security and privacy.  That alone makes them among the services most likely to exit scam.  They have little to no incentive preventing them from pulling an exit scam, and if the feds start sniffing closer, it might be the only way to avoid prosecution.  That doesn't even take into account whether the service is pulling a profit or not.

What's ironic is that whirlwind seemed like the most legit mixer to pop up in the post CM days, yet here we are.

I'm not saying people should stop advertising mixing services, but if you do don't spread the BS too thickly, it starts to stink.

[fillippone]

Wearing a signature doesn’t imply full endorsement of the underlying service,

Sorry man, but this sounds like gas-lighting and deflection.  To be honest, I don't care.  You can use whatever logic or philosophical gymnastics you want to excuse and justify the signature you wear, that's not my point.

We are all grown up adult here. Financially sovereign individuals. If anyone falls into a scam, it their sole responsibility.
As a member of a very loyal community, I will do what I can to avoid anyone falling into a scam, included thoughtfully testing the service I advertise. But in the end, the above sentence still stands.

 What's ironic is that whirlwind seemed like the most legit mixer to pop up in the post CM days, yet here we are.

This is very true and I also felt they were somehow, tied.
I was wrong, apparently.

[BenCodie]

I knew something was fishy the moment that I saw the "anonymity mining" campaign...and the lack of information about who exactly was controlling the multi signature keys.

As for the signature campaign and level of responsibility...DireWolf and Fillipone, you are both right. The problem is that the forum has not chosen what way we want to go as a community. We have had bounty campaigns advertise multi million dollar scams, services promoted by users who scam similar amounts, etc. The fact is that there is no ruling or guideline that one must follow to ensure that they are not promoting a service with red flags.

There definitely needs to be more work in ensuring that both campaign operators and participants aren't promoting a current or future scam. A constant oversight/oversight group between the campaign manager, project admin and group won't stop the problem but it might catch it sooner, while ensuring the campaign manager's innocence IF something goes wrong later.

I'm sure with more brainstorming a solution could be created...but, just like the cyber security and privacy board, I doubt that the need will be fulfilled.

[Poker Player]

There definitely needs to be more work in ensuring that both campaign operators and participants aren't promoting a current or future scam.

I don't know what work you expect to be done when the very majority opinion of DTs is that only when you have hard evidence beyond reasonable doubt is when you should red paint a profile. The scam is only red painted a posteriori, when it is already evident that it has occurred. If you add to that the fact that the scammer spends his money in promoting his project here, nobody will bite the hand that feeds him.

There is not going to be anything that can be done from the forum beforehand to prevent if someone plans to scam with a bit of brains. It is only to be verified a posteriori, when it has already taken place.

I also don't think it would achieve much if people would agree to act more preventively with the trust system, especially if the scammer invests money promoting the project on the forum and also with a bit of brains.  

[jokers10]

I knew something was fishy the moment that I saw the "anonymity mining" campaign...and the lack of information about who exactly was controlling the multi signature keys.
...
I'm sure with more brainstorming a solution could be created...but, just like the cyber security and privacy board, I doubt that the need will be fulfilled.

I don't know how is it expected to be done. I remember such scam projects as Miracle Tele and Tartaria, they had officially registered companies, with all entries in the registers, their CEOs appeared everywhere in person and made videos. And anyway they were made to scam.

As for mixers, such projects are made for anonymity and anonymity of devs could be expected as additional level of anonymity. So how can we know?

Anonymity mining was suspicios, but if a project wanted to get more users to become bigger and more competitive it could be done the same way, so it was not a 100% guarantee of scam.

Sometimes things are obvious: stolen WP, fake team, etc. And we see that these cases are usually found really soon. But as for others... I don't know how we can be sure.

[LoyceV]

I also don't think it would achieve much if people would agree to act more preventively with the trust system

That would be very bad. See eddie13's post, he wrote it much better than I can.

[BenCodie]

There definitely needs to be more work in ensuring that both campaign operators and participants aren't promoting a current or future scam.

I don't know what work you expect to be done when the very majority opinion of DTs is that only when you have hard evidence beyond reasonable doubt is when you should red paint a profile. The scam is only red painted a posteriori, when it is already evident that it has occurred.

Vetting - requirements before campaign can be created, requirements before projects can be promoted, restrictions/levels of promotion as time goes by to ensure trust is established first...instead of just letting anyone make a campaign.

There definitely needs to be more work in ensuring that both campaign operators and participants aren't promoting a current or future scam.

If you add to that the fact that the scammer spends his money in promoting his project here, nobody will bite the hand that feeds him.

Then the community is also blame to a (much lesser) extent if that is truly the mentality - and if there is suspicion but it is ignored.

[decodx]

I also don't think it would achieve much if people would agree to act more preventively with the trust system

That would be very bad. See eddie13's post, he wrote it much better than I can.

Why would that be so bad? I don't get it... (I did read eddie13's post, and I agree with some of his points, but not all of them). Why shouldn't seniors act more preventively and warn the less experienced members? Isn't the whole point of such a forum platform to share one's knowledge and experiences with others? And I'm not talking about "bullying newbies in the name of protecting idiots," as eddie13 phrased it. Instead, I'm talking about a valid suspicion (to the best of my knowledge) that someone might scam, even before the actual act of scam occurs.

[LoyceV]

Instead, I'm talking about a valid suspicion (to the best of my knowledge) that someone might scam, even before the actual act of scam occurs.

I suspect that anyone can scam at some point, just like anyone can commit a murder. But we shouldn't tag everyone, just like we don't jail everyone "to prevent crimes".
We can warn people, but that's where it stops. Negative feedback loses it's "power" if everyone has it.

[decodx]

Instead, I'm talking about a valid suspicion (to the best of my knowledge) that someone might scam, even before the actual act of scam occurs.

I suspect that anyone can scam at some point, just like anyone can commit a murder. But we shouldn't tag everyone, just like we don't jail everyone "to prevent crimes".
We can warn people, but that's where it stops. Negative feedback loses it's "power" if everyone has it.

I agree with that. We shouldn't tag everyone, that's why I said "with valid suspicion." I think it's important to strike a balance between warning others about potential scams and avoiding hasty judgments. Negative feedback indeed loses its impact if it becomes too widespread and indiscriminate. But, things are hardly ever just black and white, and there are a whole range of shades of gray in between.

Let me break it down with an example: Just the other day, me and some other DT members gave a negative tag to the account OldCat over this topic. As far as I know, the scam hasn't actually happened. But based on what we can see, there's a legit reason to be suspicious about a possible scam. So, in this case, is my judgment flawed, and is the negative tag unwarranted? I don't believe so. Waiting for an actual scam would basically make the whole reputation system useless as an early warning signal.

[n0nce]

I dont think this is happening in real world outside bitcointalk, people advertise lot of junk all the time because someone pays them to make youtube video for that product ot service.

If you promote some trash VPN telling people it makes them more secure, while not actually believing in that product nor using it yourself, you're an ingenuine scumbag. And you're abusing your followers' trust (in your knowledge, experience, integrity, reputation) for a few quick easy bucks.

Only because other people are doing it, does not make it right.

What's ironic is that whirlwind seemed like the most legit mixer to pop up in the post CM days, yet here we are.

How did they suddenly become 'the most legit mixer' in just a few weeks or months of operation? In my opinion, trust needs time to build.

We are all grown up adult here. Financially sovereign individuals. If anyone falls into a scam, it their sole responsibility.

I do fully agree with that. However, you must confess that the reason signature campaigns have requirements such as 'Hero / Legendary member' is because they know higher ranked members pull in more users due to their perceived higher trustworthiness. Or Bitcoin members in general, over e.g. a web banner ad.

It's surely cheaper to just go for 'mass coverage' either through campaigns that accept every applicant and pay a few pennies per post, or through buying banner ads online, if you don't believe that the trustworthiness and reputation of Bitcointalk forum members influences people's business decisions.

The very nature of Bitcointalk signature campaigns means that our reputation and trustworthiness is worth something (the difference between our payouts and a generic web banner ad).
Therefore, I find it incorrect to claim that we have 0 influence over people's decisions by wearing advertising signatures.

[DaveF]

I also don't think it would achieve much if people would agree to act more preventively with the trust system

That would be very bad. See eddie13's post, he wrote it much better than I can.

I actually go the other way on this.
Personally, the we are not your mom it's the internet theory works well for me a lot of the time.

Along with that, is the other part of it.

If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. There is no rule here saying we have to put up with or even not knock down things we don't like / don't support / don't trust. That's the way it is. Could something or someone legit be tagged. Yes. Then work a little harder and prove you are legit. Or go someplace else and prove you are legit and come back here. That's the way it is. This is not the 'better 100 guilty people walk free then 1 innocent person goes to jail' this is @theymos's house more or less and potential scams are not moderated. Nowhere that I can see is the rule that 'potential scams can't have their feelings hurt' or a rule that says we have to tolerate and not respond to things we don't agree with or like.

You're a newbie, use an escrow.
Account scales do cause issues.
If it's too good to be true it probably is.
And so on.

If you don't like the way things are done, feel free to leave. Nobody has to be here.

Same way that since WasabiWallet.io went full spyware, they now have 1 person supporting them. Everyone else keeps pointing out how bad it is and how wrong he is. But he keeps coming back with BS on how Wasabi is better and such. And he keeps getting slapped down. Don't have to like / believe / trust him or the product he supports but nobody kicked him out or removed all the Wasabi threads or anything like that. That's the way it is.

-Dave

[DireWolfM14]

What's ironic is that whirlwind seemed like the most legit mixer to pop up in the post CM days, yet here we are.

How did they suddenly become 'the most legit mixer' in just a few weeks or months of operation? In my opinion, trust needs time to build.

I think you misinterpreted my comment, I didn't trust them at all.  In fact, I've grown to distrust all mixers, and especially the ones new on the scene.  The obvious exception was CM, but they had been around long enough to prove their trustworthiness before I even joined the forum.

The operative word in my comment which you quoted is "seemed."  And they did seem legit at first; they developed a unique structure for their mixer, they appeared really committed to their technology, and they seemed excited about their project.  The whirlwind account was engaged, approachable, and articulate.  It doesn't mean I trusted them, but I did get the impression that, given time, they were the most likely to gain the community's trust the way CM had.  

We are all grown up adult here. Financially sovereign individuals. If anyone falls into a scam, it their sole responsibility.

I do fully agree with that. However, you must confess that the reason signature campaigns have requirements such as 'Hero / Legendary member' is because they know higher ranked members pull in more users due to their perceived higher trustworthiness. Or Bitcoin members in general, over e.g. a web banner ad.

It's surely cheaper to just go for 'mass coverage' either through campaigns that accept every applicant and pay a few pennies per post, or through buying banner ads online, if you don't believe that the trustworthiness and reputation of Bitcointalk forum members influences people's business decisions.

The very nature of Bitcointalk signature campaigns means that our reputation and trustworthiness is worth something (the difference between our payouts and a generic web banner ad).
Therefore, I find it incorrect to claim that we have 0 influence over people's decisions by wearing advertising signatures.

I couldn't agree more.  This thread is full of deflections and obfuscations from otherwise intuitive people.  It seems like there's an effort by many reputable members here to disconnect their own actions from any culpability.  On the one hand I don't think there's any need to do so, no one is blaming the sig-campaigners for whirlwind's exit scam so it seems more like a manifestation of their own guilt or shame for being involved.  But on the other hand, we're all in new and uncharted territory.  A forum with it's own internal economy is somewhat unique, and most of us have probably never participated in one before joining Bitcointalk.  Couple that with new and developing markets and services within the cryptosphere, and it's enough to confuse the most sophisticated among us.  We should be looking at this event as a learning experience and take a more measured approach next time we're faced with a similar situation.

There was a time when buying and selling forum accounts was acceptable, but when it became obvious that many were using purchased accounts to scam other members it also become obvious a change was needed.  When some start abusing the policies and traditions of the forum, we evolve.  There may come a time when we as a community decide that advertising for startup mixers is too high a risk for the community, and the practice becomes unacceptable.

Which brings me back to the comment in my first post in this thread; mixers are notorious for turning into exit scams.  I haven't ran the numbers, but I surmise that more mixers have exit-scammed than any other service that is promoted through sig campaigns on this forum.  Now, I don't want anyone to misinterpret me again; I have nothing against mixers, and I'm a firm believer in privacy.  I stepped down from a higher paying sig-campaign to advertise for CM because I believed in them and the service they provided.  But mixers are centralized services that can only claim to provide privacy, and we have to trust that they'll do what they claim.  That alone goes against the first things we learn when entering the world of cryptocurrencies; don't trust, verify.  And don't get me started on the often claimed but ridiculous promise of anonymity.  No one can assure your anonymity when you're using an unknown centralized service.

[holydarkness]

Instead, I'm talking about a valid suspicion (to the best of my knowledge) that someone might scam, even before the actual act of scam occurs.

I suspect that anyone can scam at some point, just like anyone can commit a murder. But we shouldn't tag everyone, just like we don't jail everyone "to prevent crimes".
We can warn people, but that's where it stops. Negative feedback loses it's "power" if everyone has it.

I agree with that. We shouldn't tag everyone, that's why I said "with valid suspicion." I think it's important to strike a balance between warning others about potential scams and avoiding hasty judgments. Negative feedback indeed loses its impact if it becomes too widespread and indiscriminate. But, things are hardly ever just black and white, and there are a whole range of shades of gray in between.

Let me break it down with an example: Just the other day, me and some other DT members gave a negative tag to the account OldCat over this topic. As far as I know, the scam hasn't actually happened. But based on what we can see, there's a legit reason to be suspicious about a possible scam. So, in this case, is my judgment flawed, and is the negative tag unwarranted? I don't believe so. Waiting for an actual scam would basically make the whole reputation system useless as an early warning signal.

If I may give my two cents, I personally think the trust system of this forum is not preventive in sense of a posteriori. Some things and some users are indeed tagged after an incident happens, but it's not necessarily means every case are handled and the DTs taking action only after something occured.

As repetitively pointed out by many members, this forum [or if I may narrow it down, this board] runs on evidences, i.e.: give strong evidences to back up your claim and/or accusation, and DTs will take action. We don't need to wait for the incident to occur as long as someone has substantial proof about it, or as stated by PP [so he's partially correct about this], evidences to prove something beyond reasonable doubt. But DT will not works on hearsay. Just because someone said [for example] I scammed them, should DT run and tag me?

Instances that action are taken before the scam happens are plenty. You raised a nice one. The others are projects with questionable traits; plagiarized whitepaper, fake team members, fake testimonials, phising platforms. Do DTs wait for these projects to scam people before tagging them? No. DTs took action and paint them red the instance evidences are brought that they indeed are very likely to scam. Thus, a priori.

[LoyceV]

@decodx: you should withdraw your Flag:

I can also confirm that I received the full amount of my deposit to WhirlWind.

I've removed my Support and Opposed for your Flag. Anyone who Supported the Flag should consider doing the same.

This is why:

Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

The current Type 3 Flag claims this:

decodx alleges: whirlwindmoney violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around August 2023. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.

As far as I can see, the bold part is no longer correct, which means the Flag should no longer be Supported.

This doesn't mean I'd trust whirlwindmoney now, it only means the Type 3 Flag can no longer be used.
The site still takes deposits while withdrawals aren't working, so a Newbie warning flag would be good.

I don't think I've ever seen such a situation on Bitcointalk before.

[jokers10]

The current Type 3 Flag claims this:

decodx alleges: whirlwindmoney violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around August 2023. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.

As far as I can see, the bold part is no longer correct, which means the Flag should no longer be Supported.

Why isn't it correct anymore? Did whirlwindmoney make any efforts to solve the situation? Did he ever say that deposited funds should be used to solve this situation? What did he do to solve the situation? I see nothing. What you highlighted with bold looks like he should make active efforts to solve this exact situation. So at least he should come and confirm that all was done right.

So I don't think that it is something obvious even if escrow guy made efforts to solve the problem. I see no clear action from whirlwindmoney.

I'd say that it is an ambiguous situation.

[LoyceV]

Why isn't it correct anymore?

I made another part bold: there are no damages anymore.

Did whirlwindmoney make any efforts to solve the situation?

Yes. They setup an escrow system before all this happened.

Did he ever say that deposited funds should be used to solve this situation?

That was implied, when WWM agreed to a 7 day delay on asking back their escrow funds.

What did he do to solve the situation? I see nothing.

They planned ahead. Whether or not it was intended for this situation, I don't know. Probably not. It looks more and more like "something happened", and we may never know what. But OP was refunded, which invalidates the type 3 Flag.

What you highlighted with bold looks like he should make active efforts to solve this exact situation. So at least he should come and confirm that all was done right.

I guess we'll have to disagree on this one. OP has his money back, which is what matters for his Flag.

So I don't think that it is something obvious even if escrow guy made efforts to solve the problem.

That's his job. WWM hired him for this.

I'd say that it is an ambiguous situation.

That's not a reason for an active type 3 Flag:

a set of pretty clear fact-statements.

I created a type 1 Newbie warning Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

[jokers10]

I'd say that it is an ambiguous situation.

That's not a reason for an active type 3 Flag:

a set of pretty clear fact-statements.

Well... okay. Pretty clear is not in case of ambiguous. You convinced me. I'll remove my vote. Will wait for a flag of 1 type, to vote again.

[LoyceV]

Will wait for a flag of 1 type, to vote again.

I created one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

[jokers10]

Will wait for a flag of 1 type, to vote again.

I created one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

Yes, thanks. I already supported it. 👍

[dkbit98]

I made another part bold: there are no damages anymore.

No more damages that we know.
Anyone else who used whirlwind mixer and had no connection with bitcointalk forum can't get any refund for potential loses.
I also think that refunds happened only because manager initiative that had enough extra coins to cover all the loses decodx had.

Anyway I removed my support for previous flag, and I supported new Flag Type 1.

[GazetaBitcoin]

I created one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

I also removed my supported for the old flag and I supported the new one, as this seems to be the appropriate approach now, according to Flag system.
Very good observation, LoyceV! Indeed, the old flag was no longer describing properly the issue, while the new one is suited for now.

[examplens]

Why isn't it correct anymore?

I made another part bold: there are no damages anymore.

We can't be sure. For example, if the information from the onion site is correct, after the last known case (this one from decodx) there were at least two more deposits.

Did whirlwindmoney make any efforts to solve the situation?

Yes. They setup an escrow system before all this happened.

Escrow was set up for a completely different reason, in the end, it turned out to be a happy solution because all potential losses are covered for now.

I created a type 1 Newbie warning Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

I support your flag, of course.
However, I remain of the opinion that one should not strictly adhere to every letter or rule if they indicate the same thing. At least while the ww service is active with deposit enabled and withdrawal disabled. Every kind of warning is needed in such cases.

[DaveF]

Which brings me back to the comment in my first post in this thread; mixers are notorious for turning into exit scams.  I haven't ran the numbers, but I surmise that more mixers have exit-scammed than any other service that is promoted through sig campaigns on this forum.  Now, I don't want anyone to misinterpret me again; I have nothing against mixers, and I'm a firm believer in privacy.  I stepped down from a higher paying sig-campaign to advertise for CM because I believed in them and the service they provided.  But mixers are centralized services that can only claim to provide privacy, and we have to trust that they'll do what they claim.  That alone goes against the first things we learn when entering the world of cryptocurrencies; don't trust, verify.  And don't get me started on the often claimed but ridiculous promise of anonymity.  No one can assure your anonymity when you're using an unknown centralized service.

I think overall casinos probably are worse. As both exit scams and just the slow selective scamming of people.
Not to mention when a mixer has gods bad, as a rule they have done it either instantly or over a period of days.
Casinos have done it over weeks and months and even some that are KNOWN scammers are still here.


-Dave

[decodx]

@decodx: you should withdraw your Flag:

I can also confirm that I received the full amount of my deposit to WhirlWind.

I've removed my Support and Opposed your Flag. Anyone who Supported the Flag should consider doing the same.

This is why:

Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

The current Type 3 Flag claims this:

decodx alleges: whirlwindmoney violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around August 2023. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.

As far as I can see, the bold part is no longer correct, which means the Flag should no longer be Supported.

Hmm... I think this is an interesting precedent. Has there ever been situations like this?

Technically speaking, I think my Flag is still valid. Here's why:

I made a deposit of 0.004 BTC with the aim of coin mixing, and I expected the same amount of BTC (minus fees) as stated in the contract (Whirlwind official ANN and Whirlwind.money FAQ). On August 14, 2023, the value of 1 BTC was around $29,500. This makes the equivalent of my deposit about $117.50.

What eventually happened is that on August 18th and 20th, I received a total of 104 DAI from the escrow, which is equivalent to $104.00. So, as I see it, Whirlwind still violated a written contract, resulting in damages, specifically because:

• My BTC was exchanged for an altcoin without my consent and at a less favorable rate.
• My coins weren't mixed as expected using their service.
• My anonymity was compromised because I was forced to share private information with third parties.
• I had to put in extra effort and time (sending multiple inquiries to their customer support, PMs, making my case public, contacting the escrow custodian, gathering evidence, etc.) to claim my compensation rights.

Now, I did mention before that I received the full amount of my deposit (although technically not accurate), but that wasn't thanks to Whirlwind but rather due to individuals outside of my initial contract with Whirlwind. Specifically, minerjones and Hhampuz, who facilitated the release of escrow funds, and Ratimov, who converted DAI to BTC without a fee.

In any case, I agree to remove my Flag if you guys say it's the right thing to do. I just wanted to note that I personally believe the Flag is still valid. However, I'm not a lawyer, so I admit that my opinion isn't worth much!

[notblox1]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
Very good to see OP got his refund, and for more details please read previous posts to understand better what happened and please check new flag that is created:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

Buchi-88, mocacinno, examplens, klarki, cygan, stompix, LeGaulois, TryNinja, BitcoinGirl.Club, Baofeng, JollyGood, hugeblack, Findingnemo, cryptofrka, mikeywith, 1miau, Little Mouse, Mahdirakib, ScamViruS, Rikafip, famososMuertos, albon, FatFork, NotATether, bullrun2020bro, Charles-Tim, decodx, Poker Player, n0nce, Z-tight, Lillominato89, BitMaxz, btc_angela, LogitechMouse, salad daging, FinneysTrueVision, SamReomo, AHOYBRAUSE

Support or Oppose, it is your choice.
Thank you all.

[mikeywith]

The current Type 3 Flag claims this:

decodx alleges: whirlwindmoney violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around August 2023. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.

As far as I can see, the bold part is no longer correct, which means the Flag should no longer be Supported.

1- The act DID result in damages
2- WW did NOT make the victims roughly whole, it just so happened they left some funds in escrow.

I believe the flag still stands perfectly valid, untill WW show up and make the victims roughly whole.

We can even argue that BTC price was higher on the day they stopped working compared to when we got our money from escrow, so there is at least a small damage that has not been fixed.

My understanding of this type of flags is the accused party MUST fix the issue themselves, in other words, if there was no fund in escrow and someone managed to hack WW's server and paid the victims, does that also mean this flag is not valid? i do not think this is what theymos means.

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
Very good to see OP got his refund, and for more details please read previous posts to understand better what happened,
Please remove your support and support new flag that is created:

Why do you think everyone would remove the support? This is still a topic of discussion, I disagree with LoyceV interpretation of that text, I supported the new flag, but I won't remove my vote on the old one unless I am convinced otherwise.

[decodx]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
<...>

Um.. What? Why? Did you read my previous comment?

Maybe you just didn't pick the right words, but that kinda sounded like a threat.

[1miau]

Technically speaking, I think my Flag is still valid.

I tend to agree here and in addition to your very valid points, I would like to add that Whirlwind.money did not made anyone roughly whole - only the luckily available funds in minerjone's escrow address did. Whirlwind.money wasn't actively refunding anyone, it's just luck that the fund still has been there - possibly even on purpose to calm Bitcointalk members down and scam the remaining funds (which are certainly bigger than the 40k DAI).

In addition, it's hard to judge if all of the victims forgave the act. After all, Whirlwind.money didn't deliver any explanation, didn't even come back here after their scam attempt and that's a very important point in my opinion, how to achieve that all victims can forgive an act.

Finally, the flag clearly says AND, meaning that both points need to be covered even if some thinks one point of it isn't valid anymore.

whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act.

I can't imagine that anyone who's in his clear mind would forgive Whirlwind.money, if Whirlwind.money doesn't even bother to log in and write a few lines here. Even then, it's difficult to imagine which excuse is eligible to get forgivenness of all victims. Whirlwind.money has screwed up big time and needs to convince us, to forgive them. Since it's not happened, the flag is valid in my opinion.

[notblox1]

Maybe you just didn't pick the right words, but that kinda sounded like a threat.

Threat?!  
Better read and understand better how flags work.
I tagged them to bring their attention and they can make their own decision what to do.
I am not tagging anyone for virtual assassination, and you said that you agree for removing flag support:

In any case, I agree to remove my Flag if you guys say it's the right thing to do.

So you want to remove support for your own flag, but you dont like if I and other members do the same.

[mikeywith]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
<...>

Um.. What? Why? Did you read my previous comment?

Maybe you just didn't pick the right words, but that kinda sounded like a threat.

Ya it seems like your comment is invisible.

While I trust Loyce judgment I think he got it wrong this time, removing vote may be "ok", but going as far as opposing the flag is surely wrong IMO, it is like saying the whole story was a lie and WW did nothing bad, I think you should keep the flag and I think people should support it.

In any case, I agree to remove my Flag if you guys say it's the right thing to do.

Not everybody would agree on the same thing, do as you please, this is free forum، if you think WW did you wrong and you are not satisfied with the outcome why even think of removing the flag even if everyone else opposed it?


But hey this is a case we have not seen before, it is fun to see DT members disagree, get some popcorn.

[TryNinja]

Finally, the flag clearly says AND, meaning that both points need to be covered even if some thinks one point of it isn't valid anymore.

whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act.

Btw, I still got around $12 left on my whirlwind note but didn’t want to waste anyone’s time for such low amount, so the victims weren’t all made whole.

I just skimmed over everyone’s arguments so I’m not changing anything for now (i.e opposing the flag). Will do a better read tomorrow and take a decision.

(I don’t mind the tagging)

[decodx]

Maybe you just didn't pick the right words, but that kinda sounded like a threat.

Threat?!  
Better read and understand better how flags work.

What do you suggest I read? I do believe I understand how the Flag system works, and that's why I explained why I think my Flag is still valid. That doesn't mean we can't discuss the points I've made.

I tagged them to bring their attention and they can make their own decision what to do.
I am not tagging anyone for virtual assassination, and you said that you agree for removing flag support:

Alright, there was a misunderstanding there. When you mentioned "tagging," I assumed you meant the tags like neutral or negative in trust feedback. My bad for that confusion.

So you want to remove support for your own flag, but you dont like if I and other members do the same.

No, that's not what I said. I'll drop the flag if I figure out that most people are in favor of it, or if someone manages to convince me that my flag isn't valid.

[LoyceV]

I made another part bold: there are no damages anymore.

No more damages that we know.

We can't really Flag someone for things we don't know. The moment someone creates a new type 3 Flag with new evidence, I'll gladly Support it again.

However, I remain of the opinion that one should not strictly adhere to every letter or rule if they indicate the same thing. At least while the ww service is active with deposit enabled and withdrawal disabled. Every kind of warning is needed in such cases.

This might be worth getting a clarification from theymos on the intended use of the Flag system in this case. As far as I know the Flag system is the only part of the Trust system which is supposed to stick to strict rules.

Technically speaking, I think my Flag is still valid. Here's why:

I made a deposit of 0.004 BTC with the aim of coin mixing, and I expected the same amount of BTC (minus fees) as stated in the contract (Whirlwind official ANN and Whirlwind.money FAQ). On August 14, 2023, the value of 1 BTC was around $29,500. This makes the equivalent of my deposit about $117.50.

What eventually happened is that on August 18th and 20th, I received a total of 104 DAI from the escrow, which is equivalent to $104.00. So, as I see it, Whirlwind still violated a written contract, resulting in damages, specifically because:

• My BTC was exchanged for an altcoin without my consent and at a less favorable rate.
• My coins weren't mixed as expected using their service.
• My anonymity was compromised because I was forced to share private information with third parties.
• I had to put in extra effort and time (sending multiple inquiries to their customer support, PMs, making my case public, contacting the escrow custodian, gathering evidence, etc.) to claim my compensation rights.

I'd argue all this falls under the "make the victims of this act roughly whole" part. When you received the amount from escrow, you could have used it to buy the same amount of Bitcoin again. It's not perfect, but your loss was (more or less) covered.

There's another reason: Flags should encourage people to do the right thing, and when that happens, the Flag becomes invalid. The unique thing here is that WWM didn't do anything but it happened anyway. The only thing stopping me from going for the "hit by a bus"-scenario is the message WWM sent to Hhampuz.
None of this makes sense.

I disagree with LoyceV interpretation of that text

That's okay

I won't remove my vote on the old one unless I am convinced otherwise.

That's how it should be
The Flag system is like a democracy. I like it

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.

Um.. What? Why? Did you read my previous comment?

Maybe you just didn't pick the right words, but that kinda sounded like a threat.

The word he was looking for is "mentioning", not "tagging". On Bitcointalk, the word "tagging" is used for (red) feedback.

Finally, the flag clearly says AND, meaning that both points need to be covered even if some thinks one point of it isn't valid anymore.

whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act.

You're reading this wrong. The AND is required for Supporting the Flag, which means you can't Support it if only one of the parts is true. So if there's damage, AND it wasn't forgiven, the Flag can be Supported. But if there's no damage AND it wasn't forgiven, the Flag becomes invalid. Or, if there is damage AND it was forgiven, the Flag also becomes invalid.
Think of it as a logical operator.

While I trust Loyce judgment I think he got it wrong this time, removing vote may be "ok", but going as far as opposing the flag is surely wrong IMO, it is like saying the whole story was a lie and WW did nothing bad

That's not what Opposing a Flag means. Opposing a Flag only means that that specific Flag is incorrect at that moment. There are more scammers on Bitcointalk who have many inactive Flags, until they received a correct one which was Supported. Inactive Flags mean nothing, neither good nor bad.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see a big red warning shown to everyone above their topics. But it should be based on a Flag I can agree on, based on the rules that the Flag system was created on.

whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act.

Btw, I still got around $12 left on my whirlwind note but didn’t want to waste anyone’s time for such low amount, so the victims weren’t all made whole.

Lol. I don't think that's a valid loophole

[Poker Player]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
Very good to see OP got his refund, and for more details please read previous posts to understand better what happened,
Please remove your support and support new flag that is created:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

Apart from the fact that removing support for flag type 3 and support for type 1 would supposedly be the right thing to do, what difference does it make in terms of warning of the risk? I see that there are a lot of us who have not withdrawn support for type 3 and I am sure that more than half of us have heard about it.

Seeing that there are disparate opinions on the matter, I'm going to stand still for the moment.

[jokers10]

While I trust Loyce judgment I think he got it wrong this time, removing vote may be "ok", but going as far as opposing the flag is surely wrong IMO, it is like saying the whole story was a lie and WW did nothing bad, I think you should keep the flag and I think people should support it.

Yeap, that's it. LoyceV convinced me that in ambiguous situation the support of a flag can be unnecessary, but at the same time as the situation is still ambiguous I see no reason for opposing it. As usual there's a third way, not doing any of these.

And keeping in mind that this situation is still ambiguous, I think that everyone has a right to see this situation in a different light and keep their votes.

Until consensus is found (what will hardly happen, as to me) IMO both voting for and not voting for this flag is okay. I'm not sure that opposing is right as it is not a clear case and we are not a jury.

[FatFork]

It looks like both sides have good points. Decodx says that whirlwind didn't hold up their end of the deal, while LoyceV argues that he was mostly compensated (money-wise). So, whether to support the Type-3 Flag or not really comes down to how each of us sees the situation and our own viewpoints on the matter. It's a decision that's influenced by our individual assessments and perspectives. And, there shouldn't be any "tagging" involved, from any side, as that would go against the intended use of the trust system.

whirlwindmoney did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act.

Btw, I still got around $12 left on my whirlwind note but didn’t want to waste anyone’s time for such low amount, so the victims weren’t all made whole.

Lol. I don't think that's a valid loophole

Here's a valid loophole: given that whirlwind's Tor site is still operational in some way, decodex could deposit another 0.001 BTC (the minimum required for mixing) and share the evidence here. This way, the Type-3 Flag becomes valid again, aligning with all the relevant points.

[LoyceMobile]

Here's a valid loophole: given that whirlwind's Tor site is still operational in some way, decodex could deposit another 0.001 BTC (the minimum required for mixing) and share the evidence here. This way, the Type-3 Flag becomes valid again, aligning with all the relevant points.

That's not a loophole, it's throwing money away.

[jokers10]

Here's a valid loophole: given that whirlwind's Tor site is still operational in some way, decodex could deposit another 0.001 BTC (the minimum required for mixing) and share the evidence here. This way, the Type-3 Flag becomes valid again, aligning with all the relevant points.

There's no need in additional evidence of that the mixer is not working properly anymore. We all know that. So as LoyceMobile said, it's just "throwing money away". And deliberate provocation of a crime won't add anything. All we need for our conclusions is on the table already. Whirlwind scammed, it's a fact. The only doubts are about which types of flags are the most appropriate in this case. And making additional act of losing money in a scam project just to have one type of a flag instead another is IMO ethically dubious.

[NotATether]

Here's a valid loophole: given that whirlwind's Tor site is still operational in some way, decodex could deposit another 0.001 BTC (the minimum required for mixing) and share the evidence here. This way, the Type-3 Flag becomes valid again, aligning with all the relevant points.

I have not seen anyone who so willingly wants to part with money, even if it's just $20, to a service that is not functioning anymore. How do you possibly think he will get a refund for that amount in any situation where he wanted to reclaim it? Just go to minerjones and ask for more DAI? No, that would display incompetence.

[Rikafip]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
Very good to see OP got his refund, and for more details please read previous posts to understand better what happened,
Please remove your support and support new flag that is created:

Since OP (and the others) got refund not from whirlwind directly but thanks to the fact that they left some escrowed money, I am not removing support for the flag.

Btw, I still got around $12 left on my whirlwind note but didn’t want to waste anyone’s time for such low amount, so the victims weren’t all made whole.

I almost left similar amount there as well, thinking that it's not worth the other people's time but then I thought fuck it, $10 in BTC now might be much more in the future so I got it out. Afterall, every satoshi counts.  

[NotATether]

Do you think we are stupid?

[jokers10]

Do you think we are stupid?

"Report to moderator" works fast. It was obvious spam/off topic, not only scam.

[cryptofrka]

I have to agree with this part.

I can't imagine that anyone who's in his clear mind would forgive Whirlwind.money, if Whirlwind.money doesn't even bother to log in and write a few lines here. Even then, it's difficult to imagine which excuse is eligible to get forgivenness of all victims. Whirlwind.money has screwed up big time and needs to convince us, to forgive them. Since it's not happened, the flag is valid in my opinion.

It was poorly handled by WW, and we were lucky to be made whole due to the escrow funds being kept by a forum member. Not sure if that counts as WW repaying the damages.

Then again, funds in escrow were made available by WW, for reimbursement purposes - so I have to agree with the whole part of this as well:

I'd argue all this falls under the "make the victims of this act roughly whole" part. When you received the amount from escrow, you could have used it to buy the same amount of Bitcoin again. It's not perfect, but your loss was (more or less) covered.

There's another reason: Flags should encourage people to do the right thing, and when that happens, the Flag becomes invalid. The unique thing here is that WWM didn't do anything but it happened anyway. The only thing stopping me from going for the "hit by a bus"-scenario is the message WWM sent to Hhampuz.
None of this makes sense.

I bolded the crucial part for me - considering that it happened by pure chance, I'm still inclined to support the flag. I will follow the thread in the following days and revise my decision if I feel it is more fair to do so.

[minerjones]

• My BTC was exchanged for an altcoin without my consent and at a less favorable rate.

I usually don't engage outside of the collectibles section, but just wanted to clarify this point:

Your BTC was not exchanged for an altcoin, it is still locked in the multi-sig BTC wallet.

You received the altcoin because this is what was available for payouts that was not locked in a multi-sig wallet

Good thing the altcoin wallet was not multi-sig, as then there would have been zero payouts

Thank you

[LoyceV]

I've changed my stance on the type 3 Flag:

@decodx: you should withdraw your Flag:

I can also confirm that I received the full amount of my deposit to WhirlWind.

I've removed my Support and Opposed for your Flag. Anyone who Supported the Flag should consider doing the same.

After reading many different views, "do nothing" seems better now. I'm neither Supporting nor Opposing the type 3 Flag (but I do Support the type 1 Flag).

[mikeywith]

After reading many different views, "do nothing" seems better now. I'm neither Supporting nor Opposing the type 3 Flag (but I do Support the type 1 Flag).

This is a lot more reasonable IMO, because by opposing the flag you give the impression to other users that you think the whole accusation is false as if it never actually happened, and if enough people oppose the flag it would seem more like (decodx is a liar, WW is the victim), the majority of people won't read the text describing what type of flag that is, they would take your opinion on it as a defense, of course, everyone is free to do as they please, but i am glad that we could reach to mutual agreement of some kind.

This incident also raised another issue, it seems like your influence is dangerously strong  , look at notblox1, he did not even read OP's response to your message and went ahead to oppose the flag and ask everyone else to do the same. .

[notblox1]

What do you suggest I read? I do believe I understand how the Flag system works, and that's why I explained why I think my Flag is still valid. That doesn't mean we can't discuss the points I've made.

Sure we can, but I think this topics is slowly turning into signature spam fest.
I was following events from start and I heard some members telling me I didnt read what you wrote 
You said that you received DAI instead by manager, but one member offered direct conversion to BTC, and you probably received more than you sent, because Bitcoin price dropped.

look at notblox1, he did not even read OP's response to your message and went ahead to oppose the flag and ask everyone else to do the same. .

I am glad that I helped you to fill up your 40 posts for this week, by pretending that you know if I read or didnt read what OP wrote.
Nobody influenced me to change my decision in any way, and luckily I am not a member of bitcointalk communist party.

[jokers10]

This incident also raised another issue, it seems like your influence is dangerously strong  , look at notblox1, he did not even read OP's response to your message and went ahead to oppose the flag and ask everyone else to do the same. .

When someone becomes reputable enough it is inevitable that he gets some followers. It is not such a big problem as long as that reputable person keeps listening to argues and takes part in discussion. Of course you need to convince him if you want to have an impact on his followers, but if it is possible it's not the biggest problem. IMO.

[mikeywith]

I am glad that I helped you to fill up your 40 posts for this week, by pretending that you know if I read or didnt read what OP wrote.
Nobody influenced me to change my decision in any way, and luckily I am not a member of bitcointalk communist party.

Lol
1- it is 25 not 40, actually, even during my time with CM when the pay rate was extremely high I rarely ever came close to full quota not even close, I only post when I feel like it, so you can use this argument against someone else, clearly does not work for me.

2- I don't have a crystal ball to know if you read it, I can only judge by your comment, you simply ignored OP's response (he owns the flag by the way) and went a head tag everyone saying "they should remove their support for the flag", it clearly shows you did not even read his comment, if you did and still wrote that  -- it is even worse.

3- Ya, probably good you are not a member of the BCP.

4- I recall you were salty when I commented on your "mining pool topic", it seems like it is a habit, so I will refrain from commenting on your posts from now on.

When someone becomes reputable enough it is inevitable that he gets some followers. It is not such a big problem as long as that reputable person keeps listening to argues and takes part in discussion. Of course you need to convince him if you want to have an impact on his followers, but if it is possible it's not the biggest problem. IMO.

Sure thing not a huge problem, my comment was more of a lame joke.

[decodx]

What do you suggest I read? I do believe I understand how the Flag system works, and that's why I explained why I think my Flag is still valid. That doesn't mean we can't discuss the points I've made.

Sure we can, but I think this topics is slowly turning into signature spam fest.
I was following events from start and I heard some members telling me I didnt read what you wrote 
You said that you received DAI instead by manager, but one member offered direct conversion to BTC, and you probably received more than you sent, because Bitcoin price dropped.

Come on dude, really? I've got mad respect for you and all, but it kinda feels like you're not even checking out my comments when you fire back.

Did you read my previous comment?

I'm pretty sure I explained every detail, so I don't know where you got the idea that I could have received more because Bitcoin price dropped?

• My BTC was exchanged for an altcoin without my consent and at a less favorable rate.

I usually don't engage outside of the collectibles section, but just wanted to clarify this point:

Your BTC was not exchanged for an altcoin, it is still locked in the multi-sig BTC wallet.

You received the altcoin because this is what was available for payouts that was not locked in a multi-sig wallet

Good thing the altcoin wallet was not multi-sig, as then there would have been zero payouts

Thank you

Totally get it. You did your part without a hitch as far as I'm concerned. I was just breaking down the situation from my point of view.

Here's a valid loophole: given that whirlwind's Tor site is still operational in some way, decodex could deposit another 0.001 BTC (the minimum required for mixing) and share the evidence here. This way, the Type-3 Flag becomes valid again, aligning with all the relevant points.

That's not a loophole, it's throwing money away.

LOL! No, I'm not going to do that.

[LoyceV]

This incident also raised another issue, it seems like your influence is dangerously strong 

I like to think my arguments are dangerously strong And there was quite some opposition in this topic, which I can only encourage.

I'm not disappointed by the end result though: the type 3 Flag is still active, but has less Support. The warning is still there, but at least many people realized that (so far) there is no victim (although something could have happened to WWM).

I usually don't engage outside of the collectibles section, but just wanted to clarify this point:

Your BTC was not exchanged for an altcoin, it is still locked in the multi-sig BTC wallet.

You received the altcoin because this is what was available for payouts that was not locked in a multi-sig wallet

For contingencies: are you keeping accurate records including all evidence (such as LoG)? In case something did happen to WWM, and they do come back, all "notes" that have been paid from escrow should be invalidated before the service can resume withdrawals.

[cryptofrka]

I'm not disappointed by the end result though: the type 3 Flag is still active, but has less Support. The warning is still there, but at least many people realized that (so far) there is no victim (although something could have happened to WWM).

Shouldn't the fact alone that the site is still operational through Tor be enough for a type 3 Flag to be active?
Do we also give WW a free pass because all forum members were lucky to be compensated without any involvement by WW?

________________________________

Not trying to argue, it's kinda borderline and I'm still trying to decide on how to personally approach this.

As it stands - my view is that anybody can still get scammed and the situation wasn't remedied by WW.
There are almost certainly people that weren't made whole outside of BTT, but I agree with you there - we can't Flag based on assumptions - however statistically accurate they might seem.

[LoyceV]

Shouldn't the fact alone that the site is still operational through Tor be enough for a type 3 Flag to be active?

It doesn't match the flag description, see the discussion in Trust flags.

Do we also give WW a free pass because all forum members were lucky to be compensated without any involvement by WW?

Definitely not.

my view is that anybody can still get scammed and the situation wasn't remedied by WW.

Yep. But no Flag is going to change that if they find the .onion site in their bookmarks.

[cryptofrka]

It doesn't match the flag description, see the discussion in Trust flags.

Yup, precisely - which basically puts us between 2 choices. We can either:

- have a type 3 flag active although technically it isn't fully compliant with the rules
- be compliant with the rules and not have the highest level of warning raised, although most of us feel there should be one.

By raising a type 3 flag here I do understand that we're kinda creating a precedent, but I also feel that it's the right course of action, everything considered.

Considering that this is also to be expected,

In that case, it may work to require 10+ Supporters for that Flag, to make it really a rare thing. But I doubt we'll see another Flag just for a once-in-4-years anomaly.

maybe some leeway in cases like these isn't such a bad thing?
After all, it's a forum, not a courtroom - so the repercussions of our (potentially incorrect?) actions won't be that severe.

[LoyceMobile]

maybe some leeway in cases like these isn't such a bad thing?
After all, it's a forum, not a courtroom - so the repercussions of our (potentially incorrect?) actions won't be that severe.

You'll risk turning the Flag system into the feedback systeem, where negative feedback is easily handed out. I think that's the reason theymos set strict rules for the Flag system.

[stompix]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.

And you are?

You'll risk turning the Flag system into the feedback systeem, where negative feedback is easily handed out. I think that's the reason theymos set strict rules for the Flag system.

I think we're turning the flag system into a debate at Athenes's Lyceum trying to figure out if water will still get you wet if you're taking a bath in a pool full of cola.

Since OP (and the others) got refund not from whirlwind directly but thanks to the fact that they left some escrowed money, I am not removing support for the flag.

Me neither, the support stays!

Btw, I still got around $12 left on my whirlwind note but didn’t want to waste anyone’s time for such low amount, so the victims weren’t all made whole.

I almost left similar amount there as well, thinking that it's not worth the other people's time but then I thought fuck it, $10 in BTC now might be much more in the future so I got it out. Afterall, every satoshi counts. 

If the site is still up (can't check over tor) then I assume the intenal note transfer is still up also.
So two or three users could combine the dust and ask for a withdrawal, if that doesn't happen then.. flagggggg!

[notblox1]

Come on dude, really? I've got mad respect for you and all, but it kinda feels like you're not even checking out my comments when you fire back.

Give me a break dude please.
I was one of the first guys to support flag when it was created, and I not defending whirwind for what they did.
One of the main reasons I changed my opinion because you wrote that you are removing support for your own flag.
This is my last post in this topic, I wont participate anymore in this discussion and I wont reply to anyone.
Enjoy.

And you are?

Stompix, I am your father.

[Poker Player]

After all, it's a forum, not a courtroom...

Well, it's quite funny that you say that, because there are a lot of DTs who believe that the trust system should function as a courtroom.

At the end of all this I have gone to support flag type 1 and I see that there are a few of us who support both flags. I don't think that much more debate is going to change the support to flag type 3. Even more so when the arguments seem to become entrenched and some people get annoyed, as usually happens with discussions of this type when they are prolonged.

[decodx]

One of the main reasons I changed my opinion because you wrote that you are removing support for your own flag.

With all due respect, I never said that. Not like that. I said "if".

I don't mind if you withdraw support or oppose my flag. It is your right.

[cryptofrka]

You'll risk turning the Flag system into the feedback systeem, where negative feedback is easily handed out. I think that's the reason theymos set strict rules for the Flag system.

Yeah, I understand that point. But then again, this happened for the first time in years and nobody expects it to happen again.
If it does continue to happen though, there's no appropriate way to flag it and we need a new solution (or an agreed upon course of action) anyway.

After all, it's a forum, not a courtroom...

Well, it's quite funny that you say that, because there are a lot of DTs who believe that the trust system should function as a courtroom.

You could have used the full sentence as a quote then
No matter how important we like to think we are, we're just some forum people. The repercussions in a court room are real, whereas we're just playing with our water guns here.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

I am tagging everyone who is still supporting old decodx flag.
Very good to see OP got his refund, and for more details please read previous posts to understand better what happened and please check new flag that is created:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3207

Buchi-88, mocacinno, examplens, klarki, cygan, stompix, LeGaulois, TryNinja, BitcoinGirl.Club, Baofeng, JollyGood, hugeblack, Findingnemo, cryptofrka, mikeywith, 1miau, Little Mouse, Mahdirakib, ScamViruS, Rikafip, famososMuertos, albon, FatFork, NotATether, bullrun2020bro, Charles-Tim, decodx, Poker Player, n0nce, Z-tight, Lillominato89, BitMaxz, btc_angela, LogitechMouse, salad daging, FinneysTrueVision, SamReomo, AHOYBRAUSE

Support or Oppose, it is your choice.
Thank you all.

I am not withdrawing my support. The refund were not done by Whirlwind but the money they left mistaken [Perhaps] in the escrow which was not taken back after the review campaign. If there were not this money then none would get their money.

You'll risk turning the Flag system into the feedback systeem, where negative feedback is easily handed out. I think that's the reason theymos set strict rules for the Flag system.

I think we're turning the flag system into a debate at Athenes's Lyceum trying to figure out if water will still get you wet if you're taking a bath in a pool full of cola.

+1
I don't think there we need any debate.

[1.] Is anyone here who will say Whirlwind is not a scam?
[2.] Anyone here is going to use Whirlwind anymore?

I don't mind if you withdraw support or oppose my flag. It is your right.

Did you receive money from Whirlwind? No.
What if the escrow funds were not there?
You wouldn't get a penny back.

So fuck all these shit, please no one tag me to reconsider my support. Thank you.