Mixer restrictions

[coupable]

I am thinking that I will change the rules to allow:
 - Unpaid linking directly to mixers in posts, as long as the mixers aren't also "illegal darknet sites" (which is a term I need to more exactly define).
 - Easing the enforcement of indirection. For example, in the past we would not allow sig ads which point to an article talking about and linking to a mixer. But it's probably OK now if this kind of thing is allowed.

1. This seems necessary; at least, it should be allowed in Scam Accusations board.
2. What about ANN advertising/ sig ads without links? That would be a compromise since access to the mixer isn't directly through the forum.

1. In Scam Accusations board, discussions about illegal mixers running in the darkweb can't be excluded. Allowing unpaid linking can't be limited to one type but not another.
2. It shouldn't be allowed as well. ANN threads is also a kind of advertisement with official representatives of mixers. However unpaid links in user posts discussing mixers should be allowed with some ethical limits, because discussion should mean discussion not advertising.

[examplens]

I am thinking that I will change the rules to allow:
 - Unpaid linking directly to mixers in posts, as long as the mixers aren't also "illegal darknet sites" (which is a term I need to more exactly define).
 - Easing the enforcement of indirection. For example, in the past we would not allow sig ads which point to an article talking about and linking to a mixer. But it's probably OK now if this kind of thing is allowed.

1. This seems necessary; at least, it should be allowed in Scam Accusations board.
2. What about ANN advertising/ sig ads without links? That would be a compromise since access to the mixer isn't directly through the forum.

1. In Scam Accusations board, discussions about illegal mixers running in the darkweb can't be excluded. Allowing unpaid linking can't be limited to one type but not another.
2. It shouldn't be allowed as well. ANN threads is also a kind of advertisement with official representatives of mixers. However unpaid links in user posts discussing mixers should be allowed with some ethical limits, because discussion should mean discussion not advertising.

Recently, a one mixer was seized, before that, there were a couple of complaints about it, where users reported delays or not receiving Bitcoin at all. We cannot know whether a more open discussion would help in these cases, but it is certainly necessary to discuss it freely. At least for prevention. However, it is not even possible to mention most mixers due to word filtering.

It has been discussed many times in this thread as well. I believe that no excuse is good enough for someone who lost money, and perhaps he could have received useful warning information here.

[JollyGood]

I think cases where innocent people losing money to fake mixers is something that will continue. People will always stumble across fake websites using similar names and designs to existing mixers. There will always be scamming and phishing websites regardless of what might be posted in the forum.

It is however prudent to have an easily accessible list about the websites to avoid as it just might help save an innocent person from getting scammed. Whether that list would be available in the forum or elsewhere, having one does make sense.

Recently, a one mixer was seized, before that, there were a couple of complaints about it, where users reported delays or not receiving Bitcoin at all. We cannot know whether a more open discussion would help in these cases, but it is certainly necessary to discuss it freely. At least for prevention. However, it is not even possible to mention most mixers due to word filtering.

It has been discussed many times in this thread as well. I believe that no excuse is good enough for someone who lost money, and perhaps he could have received useful warning information here.

[NotATether]

Recently, a one mixer was seized, before that, there were a couple of complaints about it, where users reported delays or not receiving Bitcoin at all. We cannot know whether a more open discussion would help in these cases, but it is certainly necessary to discuss it freely. At least for prevention. However, it is not even possible to mention most mixers due to word filtering.

It has been discussed many times in this thread as well. I believe that no excuse is good enough for someone who lost money, and perhaps he could have received useful warning information here.

That mixer was a scam, and under conventional moderation it would've been banned from the forum ages ago. So it's not really representative of the full situation tbh.

Not that I want to push things into any direction, but isn't it hypocritical that services like Wasabi coordinators, Whirlpool servers, or Joinmarket are allowed to be advertised? From a legal point of view, these services are treated equally with mixers, and the arrest of the Samourai developers in the name of money laundering clears this out further. The fact that mixers require to forfeit custody of coins does not amplify their legal exposure.

I just don't see how being custodial is a requirement to consider it illicit in the eyes of the government. Either all privacy enhancing services can be used to launder money, custodial or not, and thus must be discriminated in this forum, or they mustn't.

I am convinced that if Monero was a service, its developers would've been arrested and charged by now. (Not for tax evasion a la fluffypony but for MSB voliation charges)

But I don't think feds are particularly interested in coinjoin software. Samourai only got seized because they were loudmouths, and if they had managed to control their indignation then none of that would've happened.

[examplens]

That mixer was a scam, and under conventional moderation it would've been banned from the forum ages ago. So it's not really representative of the full situation tbh.

That's exactly what it is. The fact that that mixer was a scam, you know that because you edit the list of active mixers, because you regularly follow many of them (and a certain number of people from here). Bitcointalk is still one of the more reliable sources of information, and the limited discussion about mixers doesn't help.

[coupable]

That mixer was a scam, and under conventional moderation it would've been banned from the forum ages ago. So it's not really representative of the full situation tbh.

That's exactly what it is. The fact that that mixer was a scam, you know that because you edit the list of active mixers, because you regularly follow many of them (and a certain number of people from here). Bitcointalk is still one of the more reliable sources of information, and the limited discussion about mixers doesn't help.

And that's exactly what i meant in my last reply. It's fully understandable that forum policy can cut with advertisements for mixers in all its kinds, however discussions about a particular mixer whether it's scam or legitimate shouldn't be banned or limited. A stick thread notice can help introducing the limits to general discussions in specific boards such as Scam and Accusations board or Service Discussion board. Just my two cents.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

I am convinced that if Monero was a service, its developers would've been arrested and charged by now. (Not for tax evasion a la fluffypony but for MSB voliation charges)

Who knows if the charges won't ever happen? The law is always evolving. What is OK/Legal today could easily be illegal tomorrow. We have seen Monero already getting demonized and delisted by certain exchanges. I think what is helping a bit is that the Law enforcement finds it hard to follow up on how money is/was "laundered" using monero unlike Mixers.

[FinneysTrueVision]

But I don't think feds are particularly interested in coinjoin software. Samourai only got seized because they were loudmouths, and if they had managed to control their indignation then none of that would've happened.

Samourai made themselves an easy target because they were openly bragging about being used by criminals. However, there has also been services like Tornado Cash, eXch and TradeOgre which have been sanctioned or seized. If you become large enough, they will also make you a target. Kruw’s coordinator has even been mentioned in a US government report as being used by Lazarus Group.

Still, I don’t think it’s a good idea to start banning non-custodial, open source privacy services. Despite some overzealous prosecutors wanting to make an example out of developers by misapplying current laws, these services have not been formally outlawed. Tornado Cash even had sanctions lifted when reason prevailed and the court determined the government had overstepped their authority.

[JollyGood]

My understanding is that to mention the name of a mixer is not banned therefore having a list of mixer names that are associated with scams and possible exit-scams should not be a problem (especially if the purpose was to inform others they could lose their funds). The problem does lay elsewhere. Having discussions about whether a mixer is a scam might be pushing the limit that has been imposed on forum members therefore maybe that part will be reassessed in the future.

And that's exactly what i meant in my last reply. It's fully understandable that forum policy can cut with advertisements for mixers in all its kinds, however discussions about a particular mixer whether it's scam or legitimate shouldn't be banned or limited. A stick thread notice can help introducing the limits to general discussions in specific boards such as Scam and Accusations board or Service Discussion board. Just my two cents.

[coupable]

My understanding is that to mention the name of a mixer is not banned therefore having a list of mixer names that are associated with scams and possible exit-scams should not be a problem (especially if the purpose was to inform others they could lose their funds). The problem does lay elsewhere. Having discussions about whether a mixer is a scam might be pushing the limit that has been imposed on forum members therefore maybe that part will be reassessed in the future.

And that's exactly what i meant in my last reply. It's fully understandable that forum policy can cut with advertisements for mixers in all its kinds, however discussions about a particular mixer whether it's scam or legitimate shouldn't be banned or limited. A stick thread notice can help introducing the limits to general discussions in specific boards such as Scam and Accusations board or Service Discussion board. Just my two cents.

The problem is with links included in users' posts. Note that every user contributing in a discussion is aware about the mixers ban. Some of them are newbies and others will be ranked members after few months without moticing this policy. I think this is one of the main reasons why admin think to re-consider some standards. I also think that all new riles about mixers should be added to official forum rules previously made by mprep.

[NotATether]

Samourai made themselves an easy target because they were openly bragging about being used by criminals. However, there has also been services like Tornado Cash, eXch and TradeOgre which have been sanctioned or seized. If you become large enough, they will also make you a target. Kruw’s coordinator has even been mentioned in a US government report as being used by Lazarus Group.

I hope Kruw is alright. Suddenly, all those years of flame wars feel irrelevant.

[Agbe]

bitcoin creator believed in privacy and it transaction was meant for privacy. Instead there should be a scrutiny Committee on those mixers. There should be a thorough investigation on them before coming to the forum to operate. The committee should find out who owns the mixer, and the country and other vital information about the mixer (s). That can also filter bad mixers from the market. That is my suggestion on this case.

[examplens]

bitcoin creator believed in privacy and it transaction was meant for privacy. Instead there should be a scrutiny Committee on those mixers. There should be a thorough investigation on them before coming to the forum to operate. The committee should find out who owns the mixer, and the country and other vital information about the mixer (s). That can also filter bad mixers from the market. That is my suggestion on this case.

Nice idea. Also, mandatory KYC for all mixer users would be great. 
I believe that you haven't really thought this suggestion through, otherwise you would know how contradictory it is.

[Husna QA]

bitcoin creator believed in privacy and it transaction was meant for privacy. Instead there should be a scrutiny Committee on those mixers. There should be a thorough investigation on them before coming to the forum to operate. The committee should find out who owns the mixer, and the country and other vital information about the mixer (s). That can also filter bad mixers from the market. That is my suggestion on this case.

One of the main purposes of a mixer is to enhance user privacy in transactions. However, what would happen if the mixer owner did the opposite by providing detailed information about the owner, which would clearly expose that privacy to the committee you proposed above?

This is similar to another example, where you use a mixer service but then send the output to an exchange that implements KYC policies.

[LoyceV]

The committee should find out who owns the mixer

We're not just going to trust an anonymous Committee, right? Let's first create another Committee to scrutinize this Committee, so everyone involved is known completely

[GeorgeJohn]

bitcoin creator believed in privacy and it transaction was meant for privacy. Instead there should be a scrutiny Committee on those mixers.

This is a good idea, but can the propose committee be honest for selecting a mixer without much litigation, do you know that without the wisdom theymos apply to handle mixers right away, this forum would have been tagged as a promoter of wrong mixers....if committee should be inaugurate on behalf of good mixer, let it be people that won't compromise on offers indirectly given by some bad mixer owners to grant access to operate on forum.

[theymos]

I removed the wordfilters and updated the OP with the new, somewhat-loosened rules:

Therefore, there are some restrictions on mixers:

 - Forum accounts that are obviously run by mixers are not allowed.
 - Mixer announcement threads are not allowed.
 - In signatures and other profile fields, you're not allowed to write the name of a mixer or link to a site which is a mixer or is obviously owned by a mixer.
 - In posts, you're not allowed to accept payment to write the name of a mixer or link to a site which is a mixer or is obviously owned by a mixer.

Reiteration of ban on "dark" sites

Even before the mixer-restricting rules, linking to probably-illegal (i.e. "dark") sites had been banned, and this continues to be banned. Banned dark sites are centralized services which meet any of these criteria:
 1. The site openly talks about facilitating acts which would almost certainly be illegal anywhere in the US. For example, if the site says, "we will help you clean your dirty coins," then that is too close to the exact definition of money laundering, and it would make the site a banned dark site. (This example should be interpreted narrowly: the issue is with the specific language.)
 2. The site is only available as as a Tor hidden service or on another difficult-to-take-down platform, and this is obviously because it couldn't exist on the clearnet Internet. For example, if a site runs a stock eBay-clone script but has no rules and no effective way to report illegal products, and it's only available as a Tor hidden service, and it does in fact contain a ton of illegal products, then that's a banned site because if it was a clearnet site, it'd obviously be immediately taken down or forced to significantly change its policies.
 3. US authorities have taken a takedown, seizure, or sanction action against a service or the organization behind a service, in which it's alleged that the site is engaged in illegal activity. If the site later moves to a new domain, the new domain is also banned. (But if all such official acts are withdrawn, overturned, or stayed, then the service is no longer banned.)

(I used the clumsy term "dark site" because I didn't want to say "darknet site", since "darknet" is sometimes taken to mean all Tor hidden services and similar things, and I couldn't think of a better term.)

[Forsyth Jones]

I removed the wordfilters and updated the OP with the new, somewhat-loosened rules:
-

(I used the clumsy term "dark site" because I didn't want to say "darknet site", since "darknet" is sometimes taken to mean all Tor hidden services and similar things, and I couldn't think of a better term.)

In summary, mixers are still banned on the forum, including accounts managed by a mixer, ANN threads, and obviously, any kind of advertising such as in signatures.

I just searched for some mixers I could remember on google, and indeed the keyword filters have been removed.

Does this slight relaxation have anything to do with the recent (perhaps positive) news that Trump is considering a presidential pardon for the developer of Samourai?

src: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/trump-to-consider-pardon-samourai-wallet

[hugeblack]

A good step, but gradually reducing restrictions might be beneficial (another review in 3 or 6 months).

BTW, Whirlpool/WabiSabi isn't a mixer (by your definition,) yet it's being pursued by U.S. authorities, so it's best to limit the definition to a centralized tumbler.

[SmartGold01]

A good step, but gradually reducing restrictions might be beneficial (another review in 3 or 6 months).

Well, I am just hoping that restrictions are gradually being loose and reduce from next few months maybe stating from next year something positive could likely come out of it..