Mixers to be banned

[joker_josue]

What about multi hosting, deploying a website in multiple locations, and not picking as your residence one of the few places on Earth where the government is on a psychotic mission to eradicate individual liberty.

If you can't find a way to make a stand against central authority and oppression and would rather immediately bend over at the face of the slightest perceived threats, then crypto is not the place for you amigo...

I think you're mixing things up.

A multi hosting system normally only serves to ensure that the website is always up and running, when something on the server goes down. And we come back to the same thing, to support a website like Bitcointalk, you have to use the best servers in the world, which are in the USA or Europe. You can even use multi hosting, with servers in the USA and Europe, but these types of actions are coordinated between the authorities on both continents.

I recently saw a documentary about Cyberbunker. Take a look, and see how it was possible to take down one of the biggest and best servers on the darkweb.

Note, I am not saying that I agree with the way the authorities act in this field. However, this does not imply that the forum protects itself against possible attacks from the authorities. It's better to continue to have a space to "fight against centralization" than to be left without that space.

The other day I heard a very interesting phrase: "In the 21st century, remaining anonymous is almost impossible. But the more discreet you are, the more easily you can do what you want without being seen."

And I think that's what we want to be, to continue without being visible, so that we can defend what Satoshi created that helps us fight financial centralization. The forum was not created to combat centralization, but to debate the tool that does it. If this forum ceases to exist, this fight may be lost.

[1714607789]

1714607789

[1714607789]

1714607789

[1714607789]

1714607789

[1714607789]

1714607789

[Learn Bitcoin]

Good eye...
However history shows that whenever there is a seizure communication with the world/forum usually is halted almost immediately but with Sindad it was different..

TBH, It would be great to hear what is really going on from the horse's mouth considering they are still active and they wanted to give an update on this which might change the course of what's happening...

Unfortunately, their telegram channel may be deleted or archived. I cannot find it anymore. I don't think theymos is going to reconsider the decision he already made. No matter if Sinbad is coming back or not. The decision will remain the same and unfortunately, you won't be able to promote any mixers anymore. This will be a concern for many users but it's not important at this moment.

We will have to leave the campaign after end of the December. But, I feel like this is not going to end. Bitcointalk is a good market. I feel like they may rebrand and open different service. Let's see.

[LoyceV]

Did you read what theymos wrote? "If Bitcoin is banned in the United States, I'm closing down the forum,"

That's a very big "if"!

I quote, "no danm shit about other countries and Bitcoin." His dear country is what matters to him. 

If the US bans Bitcoin, you can't really blame theymos for not wanting to be an outlaw. Whether we like it or not, we still have to follow the laws of the country we live in.

Theymos also wrote this:

I hope that he does really well and turns Argentina into a libertarian paradise where I can move someday.

(quote posted without context)

is it actually OK that in a forum of such size and significance we have authoritative leadership that simply makes a decision like this without any sort of consulting?

Of course. Bitcointalk isn't a democracy:

theymos as our benevolent dictator

Ok, why did you all have not banned all those f** Shit/Scams newCoins, ICOs, tokens etc... when we see that bitcointalk was the first vector of promoting all that early shitcoins !

You're asking the wrong person: ask your government. My guess is that government works too slow to make a difference here: they're still debating about it long after it ended.

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

I'm still concerned about phishing sites. But I guess obfuscating the URL to "Kitchenaidxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxbzoijhwpsf.onion" is too much?

[Iced]

I'm not trying to dismiss this since I see the reasoning, but there are other subforums, such as Digital goods, which is a huge grey zone to me.

I do see announcements of mixers and presumably all cracked accounts at the same level, the first has more pressure by the government than the second.
For example, fraudulent IDs are used to produce "verified" Mastercard/Visa.

If you don't want it to be a dark web, you should consider banning the above as well, though this would have a much bigger impact on the BB.

Hence again, I do understand your decision, and I can imagine it wasn't an easy choice.

[nutildah]

Did you read what theymos wrote? "If Bitcoin is banned in the United States, I'm closing down the forum,"

That's a very big "if"!

I quote, "no danm shit about other countries and Bitcoin." His dear country is what matters to him. 

If the US bans Bitcoin, you can't really blame theymos for not wanting to be an outlaw. Whether we like it or not, we still have to follow the laws of the country we live in.

I couldn't believe he said either one of those things, and indeed he didn't; the exact quote was:

Maybe Bitcoin will be banned in the US someday, and then I'll have to either shut down bitcointalk.org or find a way of moving it to some remaining territory of freedom in the world.

Given the mass accumulation of Bitcoin by Wall Street and the impending Bitcoin ETF, I don't think this would ever happen. Those behemoth funds like BlackRock will make sure that it doesn't happen -- they are too invested in Bitcoin's success. If any "ban bitcoin" legislation ever arises, they will deploy the appropriate lobbying tactics to make sure it never passes. What we will see is the move toward regulated services, which we can see already taking place.

[yahoo62278]

I agree that mprep should update the rules once the rules are set as far as mentioning mixers or bans are concerned, but I have to ask why does everything have to be explained with every scenario mentioned? Why don't people have common sense? If discussing a mixer isn't allowed and you really feel the need to have the discussion about a certain mixer, then do it via pm.

[ABCbits]

On bright hide, i hope mixer will make new innovation where they offer non-custodial privacy-enchanting service. Or maybe they should switch business where they fork Wasabi Wallet and run their own WabiSabi coordinator without any blacklist.

If you are afraid US government might shut down Bitcointalk, move to servers where US has no jurisdiction, if you are concerned about your personal safety, officially "resign" as forum admin, and hand it over to an anonymous entity.

Aside from server, theymos probably also need to stop U.S. based service. Currently Bitcointalk depends on CloudFlare (AFAIK they based on U.S.) to prevent DDoS and other form of attack, so such option would be tall order.

Does using or acting as an escrow count as mixing?

Why?/Why not?

I would say no, especially when it doesn't even break transaction link.

• Without escrow.

Code:

Sender address -> Receiver address

• With escrow.

Code:

Sender address -> Escrow address -> Receiver address

If any of these address is known publicly, it should be to track rest of them.

[Igebotz]

what will happen to the free raffles (such as this ones ^[1], ^[2]) where a card with the logo of a mixer is published as a prize (there are no hidden links or the like), will these also be banned from january 1st?

[1]: [FREE RAFFLE] - Custom UniJoin Card, (S/N 6). Only by invitation!
[2]: [Free Raffle] Exclusive MixTum collectible card №6

theymos has already stated that all mixer official admin accounts would be banned, and that any associated threads and ANNs will be locked and archived. Lotteries become pointless if the OP is banned.

If the US bans Bitcoin, you can't really blame theymos for not wanting to be an outlaw. Whether we like it or not, we still have to follow the laws of the country we live in.

theymos could be our second Satoshi; hand over the forum to someone in a safer country like NK and live happy after in the U.S without breaking any laws.

Every business is moving to North Korea and now I know why.

I'm never becoming a merit source for speaking against theymos this way right? Isn't this the work of the Sheriff?

[fruktik]

If this battle is lost, then a dictatorship will begin. This cannot be allowed. Where is the right to self-determination? What do “managers” allow themselves to do? What? Did you feel the power in your hands and start getting into people’s pockets? How predictable all this is.
Or maybe the US government should be reminded of the numerous strikes by workers, the creation of hundreds of trade unions that fought against such infringement of human rights and freedoms? Why this total control over every person’s money? Or is everyone already seen as a criminal? How long will this all continue?

=======
Democracy in the United States of America is slowly dying.
=======

Can't we discuss mixers? Then came the end of freedom of speech.

How about starting a petition on the forum?

And partial restrictions look even stranger. Because to find that boundaries we should see what is exactly wrong. Because if all vegetables discussion is banned on the forum it is still strange, but at least consistent. And when it is okay to say that vegetables are healthy food, but I can not say you how to get some for you because it could lead to a ban, it looks much stranger.

This is called "freedom of speech" in America. Under these rules, you can add anything to the “black list”. How convenient, isn't it?
Moneybags want to control everything. So we got to some mixers and everything connected with them. It may be better to take care of the most pressing matters than to bother with all this. I heard that the states have enough internal problems. So why not start with them?

What does the First Amendment human rights bill say?

"Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, the right to petition. Prohibition of establishing an official state religion alibi of the presumption of innocence. Guarantees of the reliability of censorship and the accuracy of obtaining the confidentiality of personal information under the rights of freedom of data transfer according to the law of development."

It seems to me that in this case absolutely everything is violated.

Can we consider such a case as discrimination?
-----------
Discrimination is a restriction of human rights and freedoms and/or different treatment of people or social groups on the basis of any characteristic.
-----------
Yes, completely. If a specific official came to the conclusion that each participant (mixer user) is breaking the law, then this is nothing more than a personal interpretation and nothing more. There is no guilt until it is proven in each individual example. Otherwise, we're back to point 1 of the Bill of Rights.

I ask the author of the topic to submit a poll.
Does banning mixers violate the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights?
Possible answers:
- Yes, it violates
- No, it doesn’t violate
- I find it difficult to answer

Isn't this our case?
I want to remind democratic countries.

Fascism is an ultranationalist ideology and socio-political movement, as well as the dictatorial regime established on their basis. Fascism is characterized by centralized autocracy, militarism, a rigid social hierarchy, forceful suppression of the opposition and individual freedoms, as well as the desire to mobilize society and total control over society and the economy.

[digaran]

Maybe, you could consult a lawyer to see if this is a good idea to make up your own rules before the governments do. Does forum have a lawyer?  If not, for the love of Bitcoin, loosen the pocket and pay for consultant. We will all obey the rules of your jurisdiction, if in written form and independently verifiable.

[Smartvirus]

So that is your decentralized forum?  

Where did you get the idea that the forum itself was decentralized?
From the various actions and inactions, in the various suggestions and modifications that have slowly come by, the bans and unbans of certain users, you ought to have known that this forum has a government, it’s very much centralized. It is a Bitcoin discussion from and not Bitcoin itself. A centralized system that works for a Decentralized project.

This is why, I very much try to make people understand that, Decentralized systems aren’t here to kick Centralized systems out but, to work in conjunction as complementary to the other and that’s just the best form you can have it. Monopoly isn’t always a good idea for a field.


Mean while, it’s such a hard decision to have been made on Mixers. Something I can’t accept or reject in its wholesomeness but understand why and how it came to be. Trying to set a clear path and ensure the continued existence of the forum, given that, this forum is governed by known people and hosted by a known system which could be affected by regulations in the worst case scenario.
Not so many want to be out there, standing for a course just because, the T&C has said this or that in separating the owner from certain wrong use of the services.
By far, mixers does nothing in just making traces untraceable. It’s the service they render, they never sourced for scammed coins neither are they in the line of business to ask questions or keep logs. They just mix and it seems justifiable, even the terms of service clearly separates them from any of such illegal usage but,
Has that been able to save the ones that stood out and got bigger, I suppose not.

Now, having the forum tangled in all cases that comes up and dies out over time will definitely drag more attention to the forum as a target being, a fertile land where the vegetative stage of these platforms is been grown.

Still, privacy remains an integral part of the cryptocurrency industry and having to see this service out…! I don’t know but, it’s such a hard decision to come by and I’m sure it’s the same even for Theymos.

[wallet4bitcoin]

As much as this might be the best step in the right direction to save the reputation of the forum, it is also important to note the  way and manner the Feds are moving in on crypto related ventures, it needs to be confronted with law suits. I mean, they have not finished clamping down on fraudulent systems within the conventional financial systems, all of a sudden, they are beaming their lights fully on crypto and everything crypto related.

While they might say most of these are somewhat related to money laundering, is it not worse with the conventional financial system? Why should the blockchain space be their target if not for regulations, hijack and extortion

It's time we wake up and question our rights rather than bow to oppression and pressure from the law makers.

[Cricktor]

I'm more concerned about the government and their witch hunt in progress against crypto as well as Theymos's decision to ban even the mention of mixers.

Stop spreading FUD! I've read theymos' posts carefully and can't remember him stating to ban the mention of mixers.

As far as I understand the rules, you're allowed to name and talk about a mixer xyz, even not considering his proposal of "relaxed rules".
You're not allowed to post links to mixers or directories of links to mixers, to direct readers to mixers (like "Google mixer xyz").

I can talk about a particular mixer or mixers in general, just don't direct or point readers unambigously to them. I believe this is the essence of our forum dictator's new rules. The rules need to settle and mature and I hope that posts that balance at the bleeding edge won't get a ban hammer immediately but rather some sort of limited strikes first. If it's not possible to formulate precise and unambigous rules, possible with sufficiently descriptive examples of what's not OK or what will lead to a ban, then immediate bans would be over the top.

There's so much other BS, scams and whatnot posted in this forum which didn't lead to quick or immediate bans...
Don't want to justify, easy exhaustive rules are almost impossible. If you deliberately break (clear?) rules, you have to handle the consequences.



Don't feed the troll Bitcoin SV, it doesn't deserve any attention... (even writing it's name is already too much of it)

[Wind_FURY]

somehow i find theymos step understandable and i also think it's very important that a big discussion has been sparked here 👍

i've just skimmed through a few pages and i don't know whether the following question has already been asked or answered by you

Big discussion indeed, but the protection of BitcoinTalk and its admins is of greatest importance. We can't let the government find any reason to take us down.

A question for theymos/admins. If mixers started to hire the services of blockchain analysis companies to filter out "tainted" inputs, then would such a mixer be allowed to advertise in the forum?

I also skimmed through the posts, pardon me if the same question was already posted.

[cygan]

✂️
theymos has already stated that all mixer official admin accounts would be banned, and that any associated threads and ANNs will be locked and archived. Lotteries become pointless if the OP is banned.
✂️

that is of course your view, which i also understand.
but that's why i asked the question to the admin (@theymos), because in these free raffles there is no discussion about the actual mixer, no links are posted, it's actually about a 'product' which in this sense only presents the branding and nothing else and these threads are usually closed after ~20-30 minutes
i think that there is still a gray area/backdoor here - that's why i would be happy if theymos could take a personal stand here

[noorman0]

I started to notice something that, "this forum does not moderate scams" is subjective to non-institutional users.

[Igebotz]

✂️
theymos has already stated that all mixer official admin accounts would be banned, and that any associated threads and ANNs will be locked and archived. Lotteries become pointless if the OP is banned.
✂️

that is of course your view, which i also understand.
but that's why i asked the question to the admin (@theymos), because in these free raffles there is no discussion about the actual mixer, no links are posted, it's actually about a 'product' which in this sense only presents the branding and nothing else and these threads are usually closed after ~20-30 minutes
i think that there is still a gray area/backdoor here - that's why i would be happy if theymos could take a personal stand here

As long as the brand and name are on the flyer/banner, a raffle draw for minutes is still a form of promotion. If such a raffle draw is permitted, all mixer would organise one every week in order to remain relevant on the forum.

theymos is unlikely to respond to already answered questions.

It's a simple logic.

[nutildah]

If this battle is lost, then a dictatorship will begin.

The forum is already a dictatorship. Most internet discussion forums are.

Where is the right to self-determination?

You can always determine whether or not you want to keep using the forum, and what you want to do on it, within the context of the rules of the forum.

Can't we discuss mixers?

Yes, you can. Theymos has already stated that a couple of times.

Then came the end of freedom of speech.

Just as it is on Twitter/X - despite Elon's claims otherwise - 'free speech' here is just an illusion. There's really no such thing as free speech on the internet -- not so long as you are using somebody else's platform to do it. It really just means you have the right to say what you want to say in public and that the government won't stop you... even that has its limits.

How about starting a petition on the forum?

You are free to do that.

[KingsDen]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

A bit lenient, but trust me, this will cause a bigger confusion.
By next year, many newbies will be banned for sharing mixers link, and they will be confused as to why, when seeing others discuss mixers.
It will not be easy to explain to newbies the extent to get involved with the mixers in the forum.

Let a welcome message to newbies read thus;
"Welcome to the forum, avoid plagerism and avoid discussing or promoting mixers"
If the tension is calm in the side of the authorities, you could reconsider your decision of mixers ban.

[dkbit98]

Oh F***, I forgot, is sarcasm still allowed?

There is a board for Serious discussion, so I guess now we need to have separate special Sarcasm board.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone forkes Bitcointalk forum soon, with servers in different locations, and without new rules, but that would mean different owner and mods.
There are already cases of forums with exactly the same bitcointalk forum content but on different domains.
New name could be Bitcoincashtalk forum or Bitcointalk og forum.  

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

That sounds better, but I am more concerned about KYC part of the new rules, that can have much bigger implications down the line.

what will happen to the free raffles (such as this ones ^[1], ^[2]) where a card with the logo of a mixer is published as a prize (there are no hidden links or the like), will these also be banned from january 1st?

Purge will probably happen.

I agree that mprep should update the rules once the rules are set as far as mentioning mixers or bans are concerned, but I have to ask why does everything have to be explained with every scenario mentioned? Why don't people have common sense? If discussing a mixer isn't allowed and you really feel the need to have the discussion about a certain mixer, then do it via pm.

Yeah, Bitcointalk PM's are buletproof safu and private, and you can't get reported there