Topic: Mixers to be banned - page 9. (Read 23006 times)

If a service backlinks to Bitcointalk forum where it shows up as [banned], isn't it the responsibility of the service to explain this to it's customers? Yes, true, it's a policy change of Bitcointalk and likely not in favour of those services, but a website has still it's own responsibility for linking to external sites.

OK, the rules have been made and adopted.

Question for theymos, would it perhaps be more correct to use another word for wordfiltering instead of "banned"?

Namely, if a new user, ignorant of the new rules of the forum, comes to the current ANN mixer (most mixers still have a link to the ANN on Bitcointalk as a support page), the first thing he will see is that the mixer is renamed as [banned] and that somehow first leads to the thought that he is in there is an issue.
With all the difficulties that the new rule has brought, does it make sense to appeal that this replacement of the name of the mixer is done in a slightly more appropriate way?

If I have a problem with a service, I would not feel comfortable if the first thing I see is that they have been banned from a respectable platform.

Thanks for the advice! I will do this before publishing the smart contract address on the test network.

In that case, I recommend you PM theymos directly to get a speedy reply. He is probably not monitoring this old thread anymore.

I would like to receive an answer from the administrator. I plan to post the smart contract address for testing. I don't want to take risks.

No because nobody uses those kind of liquid assets for money laundering.

Will a service that can transfer liquid assets (on blockchain like Ethereum) without any transactions be considered a mixer?

First of all, I don't publish something without understanding it and in this case, there is nothing wrong said by me. I know that Jambler has existed for about 6 years. You also probably know that there are mixers that started business many years ago and still exist (longer than Jambler) while there are also some that existed only for a year or two. The difference is that when you partner with Lazarus or other criminal organization and they launder money through you, you are in trouble. If tomorrow Jambler's partner mixer decides to partner with (for example) Lazarus, don't you think that Jambler will be in trouble too?

That only speaks about Investors, not about those who mix money through Jambler's partner mixers. I don't say that I'll get dirty coins from Jambler, I simply say that what if someone mixes tens of millions of dirty coins through Jambler's partner mixers? And what if this is a Lazarus group? Just think about it. I am not against privacy, nor against mixers, I speak facts.
And when I say that Jambler outsmarted others, take it as a compliment because that's actually true.

This is not the first time I have noticed that you publish something without understanding it. In the form in which it now exists, Jambler has existed for about 6 years. Do you know why? Because all funds that go to the investment fund are verified, coins that Jambler then resells to its partners. This is why their software has no analogues.

I would agree with that statement. I would also say that if jambler is the only allowed to advertise here, then the scenario you describe is only a matter of time. At that point all their users would be in danger of having their funds taken or worse, and the community would be running around trying to warn everyone (although when I warned this with ChipMixer I was attacked) instead of being proactive now. Weighing the risks and rewards, the right choice seems clear.

Jambler is simply smarter than other bitcoin mixers. We can't say with certainty that Jambler is a mixer but it's possible that they run their own mixer but label it as a 3rd party, a partner mixer but I don't want to speculate anything without solid proofs. So, Jambler just outsmarted everyone but long-term, if Lazarus or other organizations launder millions of American dollars through so called Jambler partner mixers, then they might be in trouble.
I think that Jambler is not a problem today but theymos should take it seriously if there are articles like "Lazarus launders money through a mixer that is a partner of Jambler" published.

I can understand the stance on Wasabi wallet. What they are doing is different than a mixer, I agree. I don’t think theymos’ statements cover jambler though. It is very clearly a mixer no matter how they try to spin it and the only possible outcome for it in my opinion is being shut down and everyone losing their funds once a hack is laundered through one of their partners. After warning everyone about ChipMixer in advance and being 100% correct and then being the first person to say that the forum would have to remove mixers from advertising here and being 100% correct, it’s only right I sound the horn about jambler. Go against me if you want, I’m rarely on the wrong side of history.

Jambler and Wasabi Wallet aren't banned because theymos said non mixing exchangers, CoinJoin supporting non custodial wallets & Monero won't be banned.

Jambler is a tool that allows you to create mixers.  It is not itself a mixer.


If we introduce a rule that prohibits from directing people to mixers then ban google, facebook and everything outside bitcointalk.

Jesus Christ ... what a hypocrite you are.

After I made it clear to you that I would not follow your lead, you started running around the forum and sending spam.

I think this describes you perfectly as a person.

Why is Jambler still allowed to advertise here? It is clearly a mixer that is advertising the creation of other mixers to users here. This is arguably worse than previous mixers because it is a serious exit scam threat if it grows in popularity. Do we have to wait for a hack to launder their funds through a jambler partner for them to get shut down and everyone have their funds seized before taking action on them advertising here?

I don't think you understand what Autoban means: it's not automatic, it's just a (weird) name for a manual ban. Unless you put in an effort to break the rules, I don't think you have much to worry about! I'm pretty sure I can mention [banned mixer] and [banned mixer] (and yes, I checked the Preview for this, and then changed the URLs into [banned mixer] myself just to be sure) without getting banned, simply because the URLs won't even show up. You'll get banned if you start obfuscating the URL to avoid the wordfilter, so by promoting k.i.t.c.h.e.n.a.i.d.com for the best mixers (according to my wife). As long as you don't do crazy shit, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

As far as I understood theymos' current ruleset about mixers, you're allowed to say foobarmixer but not foobarmixer.io when the website of this mixer is actually https://foobarmixer.io. Apparently you're not allowed to direct users to this mixers by providing a working link with bbcode tags [url]https://foobarmixer.io[/url] or [url=https://foobarmixer.io]whatever describes foobarmixer[/url], nor you're allowed to promote or advertise foobarmixer in any way obvious.

Deliberate attempts to avoid or bypass the forum's wordfilters for mixers will get you banned.

This is mostly what BlackHatCoiner said, just a bit more specific to make it less ambigous.

My interpretation here in this post is not complete as I omitted the rules relating to personal text, signature space, personal website link, ...
I wanted to clarify what BlackHatCoiner said and ease PrivacyG's concerns. I'm not stressed by the mixer rules, I'm not happy either. Can't always have the cherry on the cake, have to move on.

What could be promotion? As general talking about mixers is still allowed, I wouldn't interpret highlighting the importance of mixing coins to make analysis of their exact history unfeasible or simply for own privacy reasons as promotion.

Rules that allow an interpretation wiggle room are problematic as everybody likely has its personal interpretation of it. It's not easy to find rules with little to no interpretation wiggle room and I only hope that mods and admins act fair with the ban hammer.

You're allowed. Discussion around mixers is allowed, and so is suggestion (e.g., I suggest you to look on that mixer from Jambler or BitMixList). What is not allowed is to promote them in signature space, avatar and personal text, or to post their URL using obfuscation techniques that would bypass their word filter measure.

You're allowed to say "foomixer". You're not allowed to direct people to "https://foomixer.com". Probably just as you're allowed to say "Pirate bay", but prohibited from linking to their dark web URL.

Disclaimer that I'm not a mod, but this is what I understand from my jurisdiction.

Thankfully many of us do not regularly write about mixers therefore we will not have to watch our steps as we write avoiding various words that include URLs (though mentioning mixers by name is allowed). It will be just a small number of members that will be worried about either being censored or being banned. As long as we post as usual but without promoting/endorsing mixers, there should not be any problems.