Mixers to be banned

[Wind_FURY]

Would that, in your opinion, have a chance to be reconsidered to advertise in the forum?

I guess it will be accepted by theymos, but he is the one making the rules (he said about KYC, not about "blockchain analytics company", so I don't know if it is treated differently or not). Because if I would be the one to decide, I wouldn't ban mixers. However, I wouldn't start running a centralized forum in the first place, so I am not the right person to make that decision.

I just noticed the part of theymos' post that had "not requiring KYC" indicated. OK, then how about if a centralized entity or the BitcoinTalk community set up and operate a coordinator for Wasabi which collects fees for coordinating CoinJoins. If the administrators of the coordinating service decides to advertise in the forum, would such a service be allowed?

I believe it's debatable, but it could be reconsidered. Running a coordinating service could be part of the evolution of Bitcoin mixing/tumbling.

From OP,

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5476162.0

[1714604587]

1714604587

[1714604587]

1714604587

[1714604587]

1714604587

[1714604587]

1714604587

[1714604587]

1714604587

[1714604587]

1714604587

[BoXXoB]

Would that, in your opinion, have a chance to be reconsidered to advertise in the forum?

I guess it will be accepted by theymos, but he is the one making the rules (he said about KYC, not about "blockchain analytics company", so I don't know if it is treated differently or not). Because if I would be the one to decide, I wouldn't ban mixers. However, I wouldn't start running a centralized forum in the first place, so I am not the right person to make that decision.

I just noticed the part of theymos' post that had "not requiring KYC" indicated. OK, then how about if a centralized entity or the BitcoinTalk community set up and operate a coordinator for Wasabi which collects fees for coordinating CoinJoins. If the administrators of the coordinating service decides to advertise in the forum, would such a service be allowed?

I believe it's debatable, but it could be reconsidered. Running a coordinating service could be part of the evolution of Bitcoin mixing/tumbling.

From OP,

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5476162.0

Why would it be forbidden to advertise a coordinator? Wasabi is already allowed because it's non-custodial and a coordinator is a part of that setup so as such I don't see why it would be forbidden. Only would it be a problem if the coordinator took funds of the coinjoin into custody.

[NotATether]

Also I should point out, it should not be ban-worthy to link to a closed mixer's ANN thread. Or actually to any post in the ANN thread that is not advertising to use the mixer.

[lottery248]

i don't think that the criminals are idiotic enough to only use mixers when it comes to laundering their funding. even if you have banned all of the mixing services, there are so many other methods on processing their illegal funding, including going through a possible pari-mutuel casino betting (could be risky, but as long as you find a safe-enough method for it). so let alone KYC mixing - they can often fake their identities in order to get their "legal" access.

financial freedom is a bitcoin's spirit, mixing is one of the most important method on exercising it. understandable that this website isn't a grey zone, but if mixers are to be banned for this reason, expect a new and more complex method replacing it.

Also I should point out, it should not be ban-worthy to link to a closed mixer's ANN thread. Or actually to any post in the ANN thread that is not advertising to use the mixer.

agreed, because they are no longer on service.

[JollyGood]

If all mixer related threads are going to the archive, there should not a problem if members are adding links to past threads regardless of where they were in the forum. I think there will be a problem if members try to circumvent the ban by trying to use words that could be deemed ambiguous especially if it involved the member accepting payment from a mixer for doing it.

There will hopefully less spam from 1st January 2024 onwards.

Also I should point out, it should not be ban-worthy to link to a closed mixer's ANN thread. Or actually to any post in the ANN thread that is not advertising to use the mixer.

[EarnOnVictor]

One question I would like to ask is if mixer campaigns are banned from this bitcoin talk forum will mixers stop? Of course they will try to advertise in other places. If the mixer doesn't stop, it might be better to let the campaign go on this forum.

Definitely, mixers will go to some other place to advertise themselves, and the reason behind banning mixer is that bitcointalk or it's users does not get into trouble for promoting them.

You are right, and the below-quoted statement of theymos is enough for every sensible person to understand and know the plight of the admin. M!xers have so many options to promote their service, this is unless the world government proves that m!xing advertisements are banned. If not, Bitcointalk is a single place out of the host of places, m!xers may not even feel this, they will strategize.

There's someone on the forum already operating and campaigning for a site that will be a third-party bridger between BTT and m!xer. This is part of the point we are talking about, but I don't know if theymos will approve of it if eventually known.

I would prefer to allow them. I don't view using them as unethical, and I don't care about reputation. But this kind of thing is far from the core mission of bitcointalk.org, and the costs far outweigh the benefits.

[Wind_FURY]

Would that, in your opinion, have a chance to be reconsidered to advertise in the forum?

I guess it will be accepted by theymos, but he is the one making the rules (he said about KYC, not about "blockchain analytics company", so I don't know if it is treated differently or not). Because if I would be the one to decide, I wouldn't ban mixers. However, I wouldn't start running a centralized forum in the first place, so I am not the right person to make that decision.

I just noticed the part of theymos' post that had "not requiring KYC" indicated. OK, then how about if a centralized entity or the BitcoinTalk community set up and operate a coordinator for Wasabi which collects fees for coordinating CoinJoins. If the administrators of the coordinating service decides to advertise in the forum, would such a service be allowed?

I believe it's debatable, but it could be reconsidered. Running a coordinating service could be part of the evolution of Bitcoin mixing/tumbling.

From OP,

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5476162.0

Why would it be forbidden to advertise a coordinator? Wasabi is already allowed because it's non-custodial and a coordinator is a part of that setup so as such I don't see why it would be forbidden.

It shouldn't be, no? It's probably the best, or THE only, chance for the forum's privacy advocates to advertise a mixing service in BitcoinTalk.

But perhaps it's better to consult with theymos first.

Only would it be a problem if the coordinator took funds of the coinjoin into custody.

What do you mean? If the administrators took fees from the service? I believe that won't be a problem. zkSNACKS also does that, to support their developers. A community-operated coordinator could also take fees to support the operators/admins, and also use it for advertising and marketing.

[garlonicon]

What do you mean?

2. It is possible for the mixer to steal property passing through it. Assume that the sender does everything as correctly as possible. Also assume that no miners/verifiers on the base-layer cryptocurrency are evil. But assume that every other actor involved is evil (everyone able to vote in a DAO, every coordination server, every counterparty, every member of a multisig, etc.). Ignore short-term software bugs which are expected to be quickly fixed.

Which means, if it is possible for a mixer to steal the coins (it is the case in typical, centralized mixers), then it is not allowed. But if a mixer is only a proxy, and has no way of stealing those coins, then it is accepted.

[examplens]

** Existing threads will be locked and archived.

Archiving should *prevent* them from being able from unlocking the topic again, but they should not be moved to the Archival board. Then the first few pages will be full of old mixer ANNs which I don't think is the behavior you intended.

I still think it's an exaggeration to lock and archive mixers' ANN threads, as well as ban their official accounts. OK, ban on advertising, giving prizes, giveaways, paid signatures... Censoring all mixer links... Isn't that enough?
Why couldn't they have their own ANN for direct and public communication with users, without the possibility of leaving clickable links or advertising in any way? Officials can only write in the ANN thread. For example, blindmixer announced in advance the closure of their service and invited all users to withdraw coins from there. That's fair and will save someone's money. Aren't these kinds of posts enough proof that they need to be given a public thread on the forum?
Also, the same rule applies to seized mixers as it does to all banned users on the forum. There is no going back, not under any other name.

This is a way to avoid the omission presented by PrivacyG, related to recognising which mixer is following KYC requirements.
For example, from January 1, all mixers can add a rule in their TOS that they reserve the right to request KYC from users. However in reality it will never do it (like most casinos). Isn't that in line with the new rules?

The final form of the new rule would be fulfilled, mixers are prohibited from advertising, but discussion about mixer services is allowed. Mixer owners and their users will be able to resolve eventual issues with full community oversight. Bitcointalk would take down the "censored" sign.

The more I think about this solution, the better it seems to me, and I would not apply it only to mixers. I would apply the same to all proven scam services that have enough negative feedback. For example, the well-known case of 1xbit. Censor all links to their site, ban them from any kind of promotion, and their representatives can only write in their own ANN and Scam accusations related to their cases.


btw. I haven't recognized the reason why Sinbad was immediately archived, while some previously seized/closed are still open. Like Blender, Chipmixer, Whirlwind... What's the difference here?

It is time for all members to get over this announcement, it is not the end of the world just because mixers will be banned.

Yes many members will no longer be earning as much if they manage to get enrolled on other signature campaigns but there is nothing more to discuss here. This forum is controlled by theymos and he has made a decision that we have to adhere to if we want to remain members.

I hope theymos locks this thread and pins it Meta board. Let us all move on.

No one denies that he can do what he wants, but since it looks like that he is williing to adjust the mixer ban rule slightly, I don't think that its pointless to discuss it.

Today we should be silent about the banning of mixers, in a while the ban on instant NO-KYC exchanges will come, we are not talking about that either, after that, we will not talk about kicking out gambling. When it's our turn to throw out something important to me or JollyGood or Rikafip, there will be no one left to discuss.

[RocketSingh]

Proposal 1

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.

Proposal 2

DRAFT - NOT CURRENT POLICY

Starting Jan 1, 2024:
 - Forum accounts that are obviously run by mixers are not allowed. *
 - Mixer announcement threads are not allowed. **
 - Promoting mixers in signatures, avatars, and profile-bios are not allowed.
 - It's not allowed for mixers to do giveaways, sponsorships, bounties, paid posts, or paid ads in posts. If a thread is for paying people to do something for a mixer, then that's also not allowed. **
 - Mixer URLs will be automatically wordfiltered out, but you can still discuss mixers otherwise.
 
* Existing accounts will be banned from posting, but will be allowed to continue sending/receiving PMs for at least a few months so they can settle any business.
 ** Existing threads will be locked and archived.

Proposal 1 is way superior than Proposal 2.

I also have the following question...

What if a domain name provide multiple services, like live price, wallet etc. along with mixing? Will that URL be banned or allowed to stay?

[cryptosize]

btw. I haven't recognized the reason why Sinbad was immediately archived, while some previously seized/closed are still open. Like Blender, Chipmixer, Whirlwind... What's the difference here?

Sinbad had 50% funds from criminals.

Whoever used that service or even worse advertised/promoted it (to gain monetary profit) aided criminals.

[Woodie]

btw. I haven't recognized the reason why Sinbad was immediately archived, while some previously seized/closed are still open. Like Blender, Chipmixer, Whirlwind... What's the difference here?

Sinbad had 50% funds from criminals.

Whoever used that service or even worse advertised/promoted it (to gain monetary profit) aided criminals.

examplens has a valid argument here, seized/closed mi*ers need to go through the same same path as others as law enforcement was involved and a reason for Sinbad content  being archived here!

By the way It's not about the percentage of funds being deemed dirty why Sin was hit the hardest, just so you know exchanges, casino's & other platforms do get this dirty money too a reason why some users funds get frozen when this information reaches them...

[twiki]

I think this whole mess happened because the admin form does not want to appear in court again.

(1) A copy of all posts to the “bitcointalk.org” discussion forum by the user associated to the username “altoid”
(2) A copy of the full discussion thread on “bitcointalk.org” titled “Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Trading > Discussion > A Heroin Store”

The attached subpoena has been issued by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, in connection with a federal criminal trial scheduled to begin on January 5, 2015. The subpoena requires the production of certain records, which are described on the face of the subpoena. Please note that the subpoena also requires the personal appearance of a custodian of records from your company who can authenticate the records requested. In light of the impending trial date, please have the appropriate records custodian contact me as soon as possible to coordinate his or her appearance at trial. In lieu of an appearance, the custodian may fill out and return the declaration enclosed herewith along with the requested records.

[garlonicon]

What if a domain name provide multiple services, like live price, wallet etc. along with mixing? Will that URL be banned or allowed to stay?

b. If a site is not primarily a mixer but has a mixer function, such as a mixer function on a gambling website, then the whole site is considered a mixer.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

One question I would like to ask is if mixer campaigns are banned from this bitcoin talk forum will mixers stop? Of course they will try to advertise in other places. If the mixer doesn't stop, it might be better to let the campaign go on this forum.

Unlikely, there are plenty of advertising platforms to advertise any product.

Then the first few pages will be full of old mixer ANNs which I don't think is the behavior you intended.

I don't think this mess in the archive will stay for long. After few weeks those topics will have a place on other pages than the first page.

[zasad@]

Please tell me, will accounts like mixer.xyz that were created before this announcement also be blocked or banned?
Will all posts from these accounts also be deleted, even if they are not about mixers or advertising mixers?

[PX-Z]

Please tell me, will accounts like mixer.xyz that were created before this announcement also be blocked or banned?

Yes, starting next year. Mixers ann thread, signature campaigns will be archive/deleted.

Will all posts from these accounts also be deleted, even if they are not about mixers or advertising mixers?

No, old posts will not be deleted, new post and edits about mixers (mentioned by op) is prohibited and subject for ban.
Well, all your questions is answered in OP.

[LeGaulois]

...

He's talking about accounts, not about ANN topics or sig spaces.



@zasad@

Theymos mentionned later in the topic that existing accounts will be banned from posting, but they will be allowed to send and receive PMs during some months.
New accounts that are obviously run by mixers will not be allowed

I know, that's why answered "Yes", and includes the ann threads and sigcamp threads together in one answer.

my bad, you're correct, you replied "yes" 

[PX-Z]

...

He's talking about accounts, not about ANN topics or sig spaces.

I know, that's why answered "Yes", and includes the ann threads and sigcamp threads together in one answer.

[Mrbluntzy]

Please tell me, will accounts like mixer.xyz that were created before this announcement also be blocked or banned?
Will all posts from these accounts also be deleted, even if they are not about mixers or advertising mixers?

Theymos said that every account that are run by mixers are not allowed as from January 1 next year. From the time he made this announcement there have not been any new account created by any mixer service and that's to say that every mixer account have been created before the announcement was made including the  mixer.xyz.

If there is no discussion about mixer on the account you tag, I doubt it will get affected with this situation regarding old post deletion. I may not have answered your questions to your satisfaction but I have dropped a reply made by thymose below this comment.

DRAFT - NOT CURRENT POLICY

Starting Jan 1, 2024:
 - Forum accounts that are obviously run by mixers are not allowed. *
 - Mixer announcement threads are not allowed. **
 - Promoting mixers in signatures, avatars, and profile-bios are not allowed.
 - It's not allowed for mixers to do giveaways, sponsorships, bounties, paid posts, or paid ads in posts. If a thread is for paying people to do something for a mixer, then that's also not allowed. **
 - Mixer URLs will be automatically wordfiltered out, but you can still discuss mixers otherwise.
 
* Existing accounts will be banned from posting, but will be allowed to continue sending/receiving PMs for at least a few months so they can settle any business.
 ** Existing threads will be locked and archived.