--- begin forwarded text
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:08:47 -0400 (AST)
From: Ian Grigg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Anonymous e-cash server built on e-gold -- NOT!
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Tim,
(this one's got my name on it...)
> "E-Gold" has never even been remotely interesting for our purposes.
It makes some sort of sense if interested in metal-denominated
currencies. If not, where most people are interested in national
unit-denominated currencies, e-gold is not the slightest bit interesting.
> And what is "suspicious"?
"Suspicious" is hard to define and hard to set policies on.
Mistakes will be made, no doubt, and best efforts are all
that are likely to be guarunteed. As nobody's offering to
help them define suspicious, except maybe the over-broad
definitions of a thousand TLAs, then e-gold gets to define
suspicious for themselves.
> It would be very easy to send
> "suspicion-inducing" messages to holders of e-gold accounts. "Shipment of
> Columbian flake has arrived--transfer e-gold as per orders." Or blizzards
> of "Make Money Fast" messages, with the depositing account being the E-Gold
> accounts of one or more accounts.
>
> (A bit too obvious, but useful to drown the E-Gold folks in a "snowstorm"
> of suspicion-inducing messages. More subtly-crafted messages are possible.)
The exchange provider(s) (G&SR/Omnipay) probably look at the
memo field of the payments, where applicable. I'd guess they'd
look briefly at the transactions to see if they looked bad
(whatever that means) but I'd doubt it would cause more than
amusement, as such messages will probably cause the reverse
effect.
> Once enough accounts have been frozen, with the account holders "dared" to
> sue in U.S. courts, all confidence in E-Gold will evaporate.
... held by that class of users. Certainly. That's the
intent. There is some suspicion that there are newsletters
or other media that have been "advising" the use of e-gold
for scams. It'll take a while for that to change. Whilst
scams are fun for the scammers, they remain illegal, which
rather presents a problem for the operators of the system.
> Sounds like an excellent way to nuke these guys.
And, in fact, they are suffering a blizzard of support calls
from scammees, which they have to handle, and charge someone
for. But, why do you care?
> A bank which freezes on suspicion and then "dares" the account holder to
> sue in U.S. courts is headed for oblivion.
Something similar happens to me once in a while, and I've not
found that I'm different to similar people. The bank of course
doesn't head for oblivion, rather, I run around and find out
the information they want, and provide it. Then the bank
lightens up and the account thaws. It's a pain, but it isn't
their fault that the US is running around the world forcing all
the banks outside the US to get nasty with customers.
It is the considered opinion of the banking circles I know that
offshore banks are now many orders more rigourous than US banks.
As e-gold completes its migration of metal to non-US governance,
it has to increase the degree with which its accounts are
scrutinised. Simply to match what non-US institutions do.
Life's a bitch and then you die. You should enjoy the laxity of
the US banking system while you've still got it.
> [...] What matters is not whether they claim to
> have little bars of gold sitting in socks in their drawer, or vaults in
> their garage, or whatever...what matter is what their _policies_ are.
>
> And their policies seem to suck.
Their policies - sucky as they may seem to be - are that they
choose not to facilitate criminal activities. Now, I don't
see a problem with that, but many do. There seems to be a
view that if a service of this nature is provided, then the
supplier must provide the service to all comers. I'm not a
socialist, so I don't subscribe to the notion of universal
service. If these guys choose not to deal with certain types
of business, that's their choice. I'm interested in hearing
why a business shouldn't be able to choose its customers, but
if it is just the normal socialist claptrap, ideas need not
apply within.
iang
--- end forwarded text
--
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
