Theymos Uneasy about Advertising for Bitmixer.io..

[PolarPoint]

The terms states that he can reject bids and he rejected a bid from questionable entity. I think he is being prudent, nothing wrong with that.

[1714994990]

1714994990

[1714994990]

1714994990

[MoreBloodWine]

Bump. The least you can do theymos is reply..

I've barked up that tree at least once about a reply on another post, don't recall if it was ever actually addressed but it was about how he has been sitting on a few k BTC in donations that were supposed to be used for site upgrade which don't seem to be getting done. All though some would argue they are, but in the background where we can't see. While that very well may be true for some items.

How long have Avatars been a no go now lol

Grant it when a lot of those donations were made BTC was low in value so to get certain perks one had to donate a few BTC but the issue with that was / is just how long he's had the funds with not much to show for it at present time.

Sorry for the off topic but the point is theymos will only reply if he feels he needs to, or I should say wants to.

Anyway, back to being on topic, what I don't get is if Theymos really has an issue with them. Then why even allow them on the site anyway because like I said before, he is pretty much letting them advertise for free with their sig campaign. The only difference being the placement of the ads compared to the sigs shown for the campaign.

Advertising is advertising whether it's between every three posts or a shit ton of peoples signatures.

[alani123]

I can only imagine that it's something personal. Theymos has accepted ads for outright ponzi schemes before, betcoin.tm is known for faking stats and I'm sure anyone that looks at ads can name more examples of websites that look more shady that bitmixer.

[BITMIXER.IO]

I'm still waiting for the clear answer https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=885320.msg9785947#msg9785947

Hi, theymos.
I just want to figure why you don't accept our ads.
The privacy - is a basic human right, isn't it? We do nothing criminal. We just guard privacy. It is absolutely normal if someone won't to share all his previous and further transactions with a (for example) seller who knows his home address. Especially if he owns a big amount of bitcoins.
There are many companies works in the area of privacy. This one for example.

I want to understand your position clearly. Is it you own fear, or you have a directive from any government authority?

Come on, theymos. I always considered bitcointalk as a free forum of free currency.
btw, our ads is showing in google network (try to search 'bitcoin mixer', you'll see our banner), I don't see reasons why you can't place it too. Hope you change your mind.
Thank you.

[freedomno1]

That logic doesn't really make sense. Mixing bitcoins isn't illegal but probably most of the unregulated exchanges and casinos that advertise here likely are.

In agreement with H@C, I've seen advertisements for a variety of sites here over the years including BFL with all those defective non deliverable products a mixing service seems like an ok site to advertise, in terms of risk from outside perceptions looking at the forum would say its negligible myself as changing coins is not illegal or regulated at this point in time and scammers probably are already aware of it if worried about the negative side of it.

[cryptopaths]

Does it matter? Its his forum and his liability, he's free to choose what he allows or doesn't in terms of advertising. He doesn't need a concrete reason.

except it's not his forum.

[hilariousandco]

Then who's is it? I think theymos is generally considered in charge of running it etc.

[funtotry]

Does it matter? Its his forum and his liability, he's free to choose what he allows or doesn't in terms of advertising. He doesn't need a concrete reason.

except it's not his forum.

Yes it is. He says that it belongs to the community however from a legal standpoint he does own it. Any decision that he makes here can potentially cause him to have some kind of personal liability. His reasoning for not wanting to accept bitmixer's bid likely has something to do with fear of liability (probably criminal) - at least in my opinion

[hilariousandco]

But if that was the case of legality etc then probably half of the companies who advertise here wouldn't be allowed, not to mention banning ponzis and the like. The site doesn't endorse the adverts themselves (or ponzis) and like Bitmixer himself said their adverts are currently on Google, but maybe theymos knows something we do not and maybe he's not willing to discuss that.

[funtotry]

But if that was the case of legality etc then probably half of the companies who advertise here wouldn't be allowed, not to mention banning ponzis and the like. The site doesn't endorse the adverts themselves (or ponzis) and like Bitmixer himself said their adverts are currently on Google, but maybe theymos knows something we do not and maybe he's not willing to discuss that.

bitmixer did mention a government request in their post on the advertising thread.

Theymos does have an incentive to respond as their bid essentially stopped bidding on forum advertising, so they essentially can essentially stop the forum from realizing revenue.

It may also have something to do with the fact their identity is not known as if some government authority says that they are doing something illegal theymos cannot point to someone elses's identity and say they were the ones behind such illegal acts.

(more speculation) maybe theymos has reason to believe that bitmixer is backed by some government agency

[hilariousandco]

Bitmixer did mention a government request in their post on the advertising thread.

That was to do with the recent subpoena that theymos recieved regarding information on DPR for the Silk Road case and wasn't anything to do with this as far as I know (though maybe he recieved something else or has been spooked by it (but again, that doesn't answer why just Bitmixer have been denied).

[bf4btc]

If theymos did receive some kind of government request to not allow bitmixer to advertise/promote themselves then it would probably have been separate from the DPR/SR1 subpena.

I am very curious to know why theymos has not responded as of yet, there doesn't seem to be any reason for him to at least respond and/or give some kind of rationale behind his actions - he does seem to think that the forum belongs to the community and the community clearly does want some kind of explination

[cryptopaths]

Then who's is it? I think theymos is generally considered in charge of running it etc.

Running something and owning it are not the same thing, weather Theymos even ``legally`` owns bitcointalk is largely debatable. The way Satoshi intended it to be was a sort of charity or non profit for the Bitcoin community that would further it, not as a piggy bank for one man. I`m not accusing Theymos of thinking of bitcointalk as his personal bank but I`m just clearing up some misconceptions some of you have.

[hilariousandco]

I think the misconception you have is that this forum 'belongs' ie is owned by satoshi or the community. It's legal ownership may be a grey area but we all know who is currently managing this place and is in charge of the forum whether the way it is currently being run is satoshi's indented design or not.

[MoreBloodWine]

Then who's is it? I think theymos is generally considered in charge of running it etc.

Running something and owning it are not the same thing, weather Theymos even ``legally`` owns bitcointalk is largely debatable. The way Satoshi intended it to be was a sort of charity or non profit for the Bitcoin community that would further it, not as a piggy bank for one man. I`m not accusing Theymos of thinking of bitcointalk as his personal bank but I`m just clearing up some misconceptions some of you have.

Which is exactly what it is right now which is the truly sad part.

[BITMIXER.IO]

Still didn't receive any explanation from theymos

[dogie]

Does it matter? Its his forum and his liability, he's free to choose what he allows or doesn't in terms of advertising. He doesn't need a concrete reason.

except it's not his forum.

Yes it is. He says that it belongs to the community however from a legal standpoint he does own it. Any decision that he makes here can potentially cause him to have some kind of personal liability. His reasoning for not wanting to accept bitmixer's bid likely has something to do with fear of liability (probably criminal) - at least in my opinion

This forum belongs to the community as much as your house does. We live in a capitalistic world, people have to own things.

[cryptopaths]

Does it matter? Its his forum and his liability, he's free to choose what he allows or doesn't in terms of advertising. He doesn't need a concrete reason.

except it's not his forum.

Yes it is. He says that it belongs to the community however from a legal standpoint he does own it. Any decision that he makes here can potentially cause him to have some kind of personal liability. His reasoning for not wanting to accept bitmixer's bid likely has something to do with fear of liability (probably criminal) - at least in my opinion

This forum belongs to the community as much as your house does. We live in a capitalistic world, people have to own things.

that's a terrible analogy.

[rammy2k2]

well, i dont know if it counts, but im using bitmixer services ... just for the fun of it ... and i NEVER had any issues
will use again when i fell like it

[dogie]

Does it matter? Its his forum and his liability, he's free to choose what he allows or doesn't in terms of advertising. He doesn't need a concrete reason.

except it's not his forum.

Yes it is. He says that it belongs to the community however from a legal standpoint he does own it. Any decision that he makes here can potentially cause him to have some kind of personal liability. His reasoning for not wanting to accept bitmixer's bid likely has something to do with fear of liability (probably criminal) - at least in my opinion

This forum belongs to the community as much as your house does. We live in a capitalistic world, people have to own things.

that's a terrible analogy.

So, the public doesn't have any right to his house, correct? Well there you go, the public has exactly the same right (none) to 'own' this forum.