Topic: Should the forum stop advertising mixers? - page 2. (Read 1483 times)

We splitting hairs. Either way, he's wrong.


Good question, what is your opinion? 
by definition, it is. But promoting a mixer is not promoting money laundering.


KYC is good for governments getting more taxes and cracking whip on common people, but not a good effort to get actual criminals.

Criminals laundering money do not play by the rules and for them any avenue to do it will serve same purpose with or without KYC, which can be faked and is done at their discretion.

I knew as I wrote in OP.

I only did not know any mixer seize with reports in which mentioned about Bitcointalk.


Interesting, could you share that doc link, please.

---

I much appreciate some quality posts for the discussion

This topic is not investigation about ChipMixer so please don't do forensic analysis about them here.

Please do it there
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/chipmixercom-has-been-seized-5445014

I am surprised that many were surprised, as if it was the first time that a Bitcointalk ads-powered mixer has been seized.
The same story happened several years ago ----> https://www.zdnet.com/article/bestmixer-seized-by-eu-police-over-laundering-of-200-million-in-cryptocurrency/.


Bestmixer.io was a mixer who ran a signature campaign. However, we did not hear much of the analysis that took place now.


I do not know if it was a coincidence, but Bestmixer.io & CM was seized at the same at March 15

Well he might be an expert in what happened in the past but nowadays, depositing 100.000 USD would automatically trigger KYC in almost all bitcoin casinos.

The fact that there is a low limit without verification is not so rare either. On the Spanish lottery website https://www.loteriasyapuestas.es/es you can deposit and buy lottery tickets online up to a limit without uploading your ID or Passport as verification. I don't remember the exact limit but I'm sure it's no more than 500 euros. You can deposit 100 without the full KYC, and another 100, until you reach the limit and then it won't let you deposit without uploading the documents. The same applies if you win a jackpot. You deposit 10 euros, you win 5.000 euros and you can't withdraw it unless you complete the KYC. They do this even though you deposit with a card with your name on it.

So bitcoin casinos letting you deposit without KYC for low limits despite having KYC and wagering requirements in their ToS is not that uncommon.

He's promoted a lightning Roulet website a few times in the past, so I guess that's where his expert knowledge comes from... 🧐

---

---

Getting back on topic - I still recall the ones who had warned or voiced concerns that mixers are, was or is a grey area were DT distrusted and ridiculed.  Looks like it's happening again.

I wonder how many now former (signature advertising) bearers of Chipmixer are quietly deleting their posts (or just going dark for a while) ??

🤔

I don't follow you. For starters, most of them have mandatory KYC when your account exceeds 2,000 USD and it counts the sum of deposits or winnings. I mean: you deposit 10 USD and you win 2.000 USD for a jackpot and they ask for KYC, so I don't know where you get your argument from.

Do you gamble in bitcoin casinos at all?

That's all BS. As long as they don't request KYC before depositing, it's great for money laundering. Lose 100k in 9 casinos, and win a million in another. The 9 casinos don't know who you are, and in the one casino you go through KYC and end up with a million bucks legally won "because you were incredibly lucky". Casinos don't mind because they profit from it, and they only ask KYC because they don't like paying.

Most campaign managers place a legal notice under their signature campaigns explicitly saying that they are not affiliated with the site disclaiming any liability in regards to it. And naturally, this extends to the participants as well, though it would be slightly relieving if this was explicitly spelled out too.

Most of them have explicit anti-money laundering rules written into their ToS. Wagering requirements prevent it.


Interesting. I have looked at the unoficcial rules and I see that advertising an illegal service is not in any of the rules listed, 11 talks about linking to illegal trading sites and 17 about trading goods on the forum. But linking to illegal service sites is in murky territory to say the least, in my opinion.

What about casinos? If we want to toe that line of thought because we also get that accusation of money laundering from that angle too.

Well, I ain't sure that's the way it's. Look at a fresh [Bounty]👑PornAl bounty camping 👑 already staring us in the face.

Why should the forum stop allowing advertisment that has to do with something that has to do with increase privacy when the forum is all about privacy with it's key promotion in Bitcoin. With this whole chipmixer situation, we're acting like this is a new development to the forum. Several mixees has been seized by the authority in the past so what's new here. More mixers will come up in the future and the forum shoudn't stop them from advertising here through signature campaign since that's not officially linked with the forum like the paid ads (that has been stopped by theymos). Lets not forget this mixers hardly get any media to advertise themselves in on the outside world as they're canceled by Google ads and other crypto advertising platforms might be too expensive to use.

Signature aren't moderated by the forum as such the forum administrators  aren't responsible for whatever outcome comes from the signature promotion. At the same time, the signature promoters aren't responsible for the means in which the platform they promote are been used. Will you hold a casino signature promoters responsible for the addict problem gotten from gambling, NO so as such they shouldn't be be held liable for the fraudulent activities carried out by the money launders that use their promoted platform chipmixer.

The issue is chipmixer has been accused of breaking multiple laws in multiple countries.

People rented signature space.

bitcointalk did not stop it.

Do I think this means action against bitcointalk no.
do i think this means action against signature campaigners no.

But do I think it could happen yes it could.

Hope it does not. As I do not begrudge people that did it.

There is a difference but facebook faced an government action by allowing so called bad actors influence the 2020 election.

The reality is mixers are used to hide your identity thus they will always be subject to government interest.

Do I think people are getting busted or sued for running a chipmixer signature and getting paid btc for years no. Is it possible maybe.

No he's not. He's saying its the first time he personally read documents that mention Bitcointalk. He's misinformed about his own knowledge base?


Wut? Is wearing a signature advertisement a promotion or not?


Not really. They serve two different functions. Besides, most casinos (including the ones advertising via signature on this forum) enforce some kind of AML/KYC standard to be employed at their discretion. That means they are likely to comply with federal requests for information about accounts whereas mixers will not. That's a pretty big difference.

This is as long as the bitcoin is not illegal and the btc mixing platforms. What if a country (or a number of countries) passes a law banning this? I understand that users from these countries will have problems, but if something like this is adopted in the country where this forum is hosted? Will the forum have to constantly move from one country to another?

New changes in the world have begun. It seems to me that this precedent from ChipMixer is a serious reason to think about what the future holds for everyone and what can be done about it. In terms of penalties for the use of mixers and their use, as well as advertising on the forum.

At the moment, the issue raised by OP for discussion in this topic, I consider resolved, and there can be no question of any ban on advertising mixers. Because from a legal point of view there is no violation of laws (as far as I know). If there are any bans, I'm sure the administration of the forum will react to this.

The government is anti bitcoin and are using every trick in the book to discourage bitcoin. I think bitcoin mixers are about to face a lot of heat. There’s nothing stopping the government from going after other bitcoin mixers. Private cryptocurrencies like Monero and Dash may face similar problems in coming days.

The forum has always taken care of itself, illegal activities and scams are handled with red tags on the account. I’m concerned about the extent to which the government is willingly to take this case, if they decide to go after the signature participants (which I doubt they will), bitcointalk data will have to be shared with them for this purpose to be achieved.

I don't know anything, to be honest I was shocked by what happened in the last day here. It's sad that in the end I realized that chipmixer has been forcibly discontinued by the authorities. RIP to Chipmixer. 

At this point I really get the impression that the government doesn't want to let people have better financial privacy. I'm not going to blame chipmixer for providing the best service for anyone who needs privacy, but unknowingly or knowingly chipmixer has become the best choice for those who want to carry out transactions that violate the law including cases of money laundering, terrorist financing or something like that. But I believe privacy is the main idea, but user's greed has really misused it for illegal purposes.

To the OP's question, I don't think the forum is responsible in this case and I'm not sure if admin would stop such campaign forever. The situation is almost the same with some other cases as has been said in some other posts.

If you have to worry about that, then you also have to worry about everything you write absolutely *anywhere* on the internet.  Any views you express online are likely cached and logged somewhere.  'Big Brother' is watching.  And when someone in power doesn't like what you are saying, expect them to come swiftly for you.  That's the world we live in nowadays.  If we don't defend our right to privacy, we are defenceless to the will of tyrants.

---

It's a resounding 'no' from me. 

Bitcoin is not illegal and neither are Bitcoin mixing platforms, no one should feel they are doing something shady when interacting with any of them. So, no, we should not be worried about what we post here.
Of course if you're sharing illegal content and violating forum laws and government laws, such user should be worried, but others should be allowed to interact freely without limitations.

Chipmixer is the hot topic this week and everyone seems to have a strong opinion on the matter.  It is obvious the government are hell bent on taking down bitcoin, and cannot be in favor of bitcoin mixers. This was going to happen at some point. It’s interesting that Chipmixer wasn’t accused of scamming but on money laundering charges. My major concern right now is the sanity of the forum, I see this forum as very private because nobody uses their real names or pictures and there is absolute freedom of speech. Imagine my surprise to see a old bitcoin post being referenced in the article. I think a more concerning question is “should we be worried about what we post here?”