Topic: KYE (Know Your Exchange): BitFloor - page 2. (Read 7831 times)

I simply don't understand that statement.

Quoted for out-of-context lulz.

I enjoy a good old fashioned conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I think the points chosen are likely false-positives in that they could be used as warning signs although in parallel are non-evidence in themselves and can be coincidental.

That said, Bruce Wagner promotes bitfloor at every chance which makes me think he has his grips on it, and I could theorize that bitfloor's request to have you banned is to quiet you before anyone found this out and his business with the wagner kiss of death. This is completely baseless though, as is my theory that Charlie does accept money orders through BitInstant and merely said "I", because he doesn't personally handle them (Charlie pays attention to how lawyers talk, as you saw from the vagueness in the bitcoincard thread), but this is also wild baseless speculation pulled straight from my ass.

Why stop there? I could theorize you're an investor into another exchange that bitfloor is choking business away from and that's why you're latched on to them.

The point of all of this comedic speculation is that it's just that-- provide sone actual evidence. Things are seldom as they seem (Bitcoin Magazine is pregnant!).

I have had nothing but good fortune with BitFloor. A LOT more than I can say with MtGox and TradeHill!

Keep talking 2112. The more you post, the less credibility you have.

I quoted for posterity. I bolded and underlined the part that conforms to the "made a mistake and told the truth" maxim.

I've met Roman on a few occasions, nice guy.

He lives in New York, as do I.

Many people here met him as well.

Oh, I don't accept money orders either.

-Charlie

I think you are too pessimistic. With proper seggregated corporate setup the bitcoin exchanges could operate without any significant intererence. American Express is a great example how to set up a family of companies that will have no problems handling unclean money.

I think a lot depends on the good cooperation with regulators. It isn't that difficult to employ non-confrontational people in the positions that need to interact with governments. Blackdawg had a good post about whom not to employ: Lynne Stewart.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1035118

This is a classic example of confrontation for the sake of ego gratification and not for the business gain.

I'm more concerned how long the Bitcoin itself (and the its core development team) can survive serving two masters. I see a quite clear split in the community of Bitcoin users into the pro-law and pro-anarchy camps.

I follow your reasoning for using USPS Money Orders and I trust the Pony Express more than 99%. I am aware of one Bitcoin exchange that accepts money orders Camp BX (unless they have removed this method recently).

But for these Bitcoin exchanges in the USA accepting cash & money orders is really bad for business because they will get their bank accounts frozen. They might get away with it for a short period of time (3-24 months) but why take the risk? It is probably better to leave these cash customers to businesses like Bitinstant, BitPay, Payment Processors, In Person Exchangers, etc.

I try to compare these exchanges to Discount Brokers in the USA but you will find no reputable Discount Broker that accepts cash, nor will they allow funds to move between accounts with different owner names (even if wife, mother, etc). Why? Because they don't want the business shut down or the staff to go to jail.

Of course, there is a long list of Private Bankers who will accept a duffel bag full of cash but they don't operate within the law.  

We may bitch and complain about all these banking rules in North America and Europe but when the shit hits the fan it's where we want our money.

Yeah, I'm a capitalist.

Currently the Bitcoin market is full of sheeple bleating to be shorn. There are young naive sheeple like ninjarobot, gambling-addicted sheeple like MemoryDealers, etc.

I'll leave the sheeple-shearing to sheeple-herds. Zhoutong was an excellent one. I really admire the youthful moxie of the "boy plunger of Singapore". Somebody will soon step into his place.

Sooner or later the people will start showing up on the Bitcoin market. Some of those people will be former sheeple; it is usually the quiet, lurking ones that grow out of the sheeplitude.

With the change in demand the new providers will show up on the market.

The difference between MoneyGram/WesternUnion and USPS is simple.

With the first two if you have problem you have a commercial dispute under the civil law. With additional effort you could escalate it under per-state criminal law.

With the USPS if you have problem you call USPS postal inspectors. They'll do the investigation and prosecute under the federal mail fraud statues.

Basically the advantage for USPS money orders is that it is much easier and cheaper to start the legal proceedings in case of problems.

I know for that both Amazon and Apple happily took both certified checks and money orders from the company I used to consult for. One has to know how to open a proper business account with them.

Netflix doesn't take money orders because their business model is based on monthly subscription charges that people forget to cancel. What was that company that used to send you CDs and DVDs every month and then billed afterwards? Edit: I don't know anyone using Netflix, but for other similar companies I'm familiar with: when the credit card expires they'll gladly take a money order to settle the account.

Edit: special addendum for Death And Taxes a.k.a. Tangible Cryptography:

The Apple Online Store accepts a variety of payment methods. Click on a payment method below to find out more:
Credit Cards or Debit Cards
Cashier's Check or Money Order
Wire Transfer
Barclaycard Visa Cards
Apple Business Lease (AFS Commercial Credit)
Apple Gift Card
Bill Me Later© (Consumer and Education Individuals)

http://store.apple.com/us/help/payments

I'm going to do a full quote, because he's know to delete/edit his messages.


USPS money orders: they work like a holy water on a devil.

Try hard troll.  

How about name one that does:
http://www.internetretailer.com/top500/list/

I have no interest in exhaustively proving the point but I know for a fact Amazon, Apple, and Netflix don't take Postal Money orders and that is 3 of the top 10.  I am pretty sure none of the top 20 or so accepts Postal Money Orders but I haven't (and don't care to) prove such a stupid point.

I guess the worlds largest eCommerce company is "disreputable".  Amazon Prime is just a scam so consumers won't notice they don't accept Money Orders. 

LOLZ. 

If it's such a monumental problem that you make it out to be, perhaps you should be the first to create an exchange that uses them? Actually, quick tip: don't bother, because you are the only person I have ever heard ask for such a thing, so I can't imagine a sustainable demand for it.

I don't see any problem with using MoneyGram via Bitinstant/ZipZap, other than a few fees, and it would seem to achieve what you are looking for, mostly, as far as I can tell.

Honestly, I'm not really sure why you have a bee in your bonnet in regards to postal money orders at all.

Well, you've seem to discovered on your own the problem with the current Bitcoin ecosystem in the USA.

How about turning your question around:

Can you name any reputable, well known organization in the USA that refuses to accept USPS money orders?

Or maybe differnet way:

Think of all the payees in the USA that accept the payments under $1k and sort them into two group: those that accept USPS money orders and those who don't. Now sort them into reputable and disreputable. Do you see the correlation and overlap?

Thank you ofr your comment. It is very interesting to read a perspective of an attorney. But as you've observed this isn't the court and we don't have to obey the the codes of procedure. I purposely didn't say "Federal", because the concept of "cross-examination" is way broader than just Anglo-Saxon legal systems. I'm not going to say that you are "over-lawyered", but perhaps allow yourself to look at the cross-examination from the inquisitorial angle, not adversarial.

In commercial due dilligence settings things are different. I've seen men coming to the meetings wearing hair-nets, counting on their fingers, intensely staring at the presenter's breasts, etc. Anything that works, because you don't do it for an audience, judge and jury; you do it for yourself. The idea is to discern whether the examinee is interested in running a business or is interested in ego gratification.

Anyway, as you have seen the mention of USPS money orders worked like sprinkling of holy water on a devil. The 19-th century mail fraud statues are still potent. And because of the USPS postal inspectors it is easier for the small timer to get the ball rolling: no need to hire an attorney or deal with a local law enforcement. People can go directly on the federal level, where prosecution rates are much higher.

Please point me to an exchange that does accept them. I know of none.

I just quote it for the future reference.

The red flag is "We do NOT accept postal money orders."

Anyone still willing to use BitFloor should spend some time reading the additional ACH/EFT disclosure that comes with their account. It is almost as long as the basic disclosure because you'll going to voluntarily relinquish some protections.

How exactly is that good advice?  Bitfloor doesn't accept Money Orders so they will be returned.  It waste both the user and operator's time and money.

Um, no. Cross-examination is not a search for the truth or new information, it is a process by which the examining attorney forces a hostile witness to admit various facts that are damaging to the witness' credibility or their adversary's case. One of the basic principles of cross-examination is to never ask a question where you don't know the answer in advance - ideally, the "questions" should be phrased so that the witness can only make a short answer, with the questioner doing most of the talking.

If that's what you want to do, it would probably be more productive if you'd just say what it is you're trying to communicate.

And, yes, it is an important part of the US court system, but this is a message board, not a court.

Can you provide some sort of reference to the use of cross-examination in due diligence? I have been through the startup funding/acquisition grinder a few times and have never even heard someone propose cross-examination as a due diligence technique. In fact, the very idea of it seems counterintuitive, since the goal of a cross-examination is to force the witness to admit facts that the examiner knows in advance but wants to place in front of the finder of fact.

I will certainly agree that part of the "due diligence" process can involve asking pointed or difficult questions, but that's not cross-examination.