Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 27630. (Read 26712846 times)

"You guys" doesn't include me (and many others either), I never made that argument. And this has nothing to do with principles but lawfulness. Again, no real broker will ever create a situation where you have money on exchange and are suddenly surprised by some anal probe all the while thinking you were verified and have your money trapped. I can't wait for the day that we don't have to deal with these amateur operations anymore.


I have been following this in the past and I had the same impression as you prior to today's reddit post. That is why I am surprised. Perhaps they have changed things? How recent is the last case you heard of where they did not ask for proof?

Actually - I have been on Stamp since soon after it existed - before I even knew Gox was out there.

I am verified and I just assumed taking cash (once I finally decide I want to) would be as easy as transferring BTC IN

What bugs me - is (assuming this is true) that while I have never had a problem trading or transferring BTC in and out, that they never said I might have to answer a ton of questions to their satisfaction to draw MY money out.

I have just raised a support ticket - asking for details of their withdrawal policy, and taken all my BTC in there out to my wallet.

What is unfair is not TELLING customers that policy has changed - I don't want to find out I will have a problem withdrawing!

This is a rational and reasonable position to have.   Why the hell should they accept my assets and let me trade them for their profit, but demand I jump through hoops when I want my money back?

It's like a nightclub asking you for ID to leave when they let you in without it.

I'm aware of the context.

And as I said before: I (and all the other cases I've heard of, except for one now I guess) appeared to get out of those questions just fine without providing ridiculously complicated proofs.

Go through the last 3 or 4 pages of this thread. Count how often someone asks "does this mean I should be worried about my deposits"? (by my count, around 4 or 5 times).

I will stop building strawmen when you guys stop using the rhetoric reserved for a "danger! get your money out!" situation, where in reality you should be using your "that's against my principles, and all that btc stands for" rhetoric.

Magic monkey doesn't know about multi month uptrends, but he tells me I at least can go to sleep without being too worried

 Sorry but most in here are not saying that they are insolvent. What they are saying is that the intrusiveness goes above and beyond reason and is sprung on you with out any guidelines or clarification, thats not impotent rage. People are allowed to feel how they like about that, both in terms of the requirements themselves and what happens to the data, and discuss it too.

And that quote is out of context of the conversation which was about being asked for proof. He was saying that they don't ask for proof despite evidence to the contrary including a user who posted after that.

So they may require me to give up my passport even though they already have my driver's license on file? Can anyone explain to me how this assists the AML compliance process? Seems like totally unnecessary BS to me. I already had my dox stolen from MTGOX. Now i need to give more to Stamp? Fuck that

Im just gonna leave Stamp. Seems they are hitting more and more people with this bullshit

This has nothing to do with insolvency oda, take your strawmans elsewhere. Telling people they're verified and letting them trade/deposit just fine, not mentioning any sort of anal probes about source of Bitcoins in TOS, and then having it come as a surprise when withdrawing is inacceptable. No real broker will do this.

Haha, sorry dude, just forget it. We won't be able to convince them... guess there are quite a few people in here that got burned badly on gox and are now a bit paranoid.

The difference is, the gox problems were completely obvious a long time before it all came crashing down, just look at the huge thread of delayed withdrawals MONTHS before they actually shut down. That is what an exchange in trouble looks like, not this wet fart of impotent rage about Bitstamp's somewhat anal KYC procedures...

A magic monkey told me the uptrend will dominate at least through Monday, probably Tuesday.  The monkey also thinks this is the first week of a multi-month uptrend, although he is not as certain.

This particular monkey does quite well at darts in FX and US Equity, FI and Comdty markets.  Not enough data to say how he does in BTC really, although he did call the major tops and bottoms on daily charts on bitstamp data since inception, albiet with a couple of false positives here and there.

Dratted monkey is also telling me that my positions in non-crypto are broken now.  *Sigh*

TBH it would not surprise me at all. Bitstamp has some really bizarre ideas about AML/KYC requirements. I mean I get it, BTC is a new asset class, no one knows what to do/how to comply. But they have been going about it in a uniquely bizarre manner for some months now. And I never could understood how their questionnaire even answers AML/KYC concerns

Yes, the questions are intrusive. Can you point to a single case where someone who cannot answer the questions has had a withdrawal refused?

A plane just hit the second exchange.

haters gonna hate

I think I will target 505-508 for a buy and stop it out around 497. If that 507 level (.382) holds then I could see another leg up to 575-590 otherwise we are heading downtown imo

i confirm i had the same kinda intrusion and felt quite raped by such questions. fuck fiat. im full BTC and outta stamp.

Besides, giving this questionnaire at random times to random clients but preferably the most important ones, is the typical first behaviour of an insolvent company. IF they have a meaningful part of the money and coins but not all, they can pay any withdrawals except some exceptional days when there are too many. Then the best way not to induce panic withdrawals which would kill them would be to delay some withdrawal for a reason which looks like legit.
But as already said, there are no laws that would make them ask some of their questions including the proof of ownership of the bitcoin adresses of their clients. Moreover it seems that even with random answers you get your withdrawal, the point was just to delay it. Considering that they are not legit at all, this questionnaire seems even more suspicious.

Of course we are far from the time when there are a lot of delayed withdrawals, and they are no delayed bitcoins withdrawals yet, which is the ultimate warning, but that is a clear red flag to the ones who are prudent enough to notice.

I still remember the tremendous deny during the fall of Gox, i know there are many naives in this community and even very succesful traders did get screwed even if to me it was very fishy to trust Gox in late 2013. I will not send any cent nor any mBTC to Bitstamp from now because i don't trust them and this questionnaire seems very suspicious, as i don't want to mess with BTC-E and i haven't traded on Gox.

Some would say i am too suspicious and i have no convincing proof, but many of them did lose money on Gox and if they don't want to change their thinking process, that is their problem.

Thankyou, some people just can't see whats in front of them. The reasons are unbeknown to me unless this guy has some sort of vested interest.

Explanation

Are you saying OP faked the whole conversation from his thread, where they demand all sorts of crazy proof? http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/26apno/bitstamp_will_not_process_withdrawal_unless_you/

If it was so, then it would be easy enough for Bitstamp to say he's a liar. I doubt he is.

Jeeez. As in they've just started asking for proof.

I know they have started asking general KYC/AML questions I have also said upthread that general questions are fine and necessary. This whole conversation is about the proof part not the questionnaire.

I ask again then

If it wasn't true don't you think Hazek would have rubbished it being as it was in his Bitstamp thread and he replied to someone else after the guy was saying they were asking for proof.

There's no need to tell me to relax I'm fine thanks. Obviously $200 isn't a threshold itself that would be asinine. Clearly the $200 triggered some overall threshold.

Anyway your not going to prove your point by just saying they've been asking questions for ages. We know that.