does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered
It is a crypto exchange. Operating in an opaque manner. Their potential for insolvency should _always_ be considered.
Of course, we take these matters with a grain of salt - but presuming insolvency seems a bit much, even though it remains a factor, like you mentioned.
Crypto exchanges inherently have a huge incentive to operate in a partial reserve manner. Such would be dishonest, but very, very, very^very, profitable. One must always be wary of malfeasance.
Of course, again. Seems a bit too much to presume malfeasance, even if we remain wary of it.
I employ exchanges, too. With a small fraction of my overall holdings. As a calculated risk. But always aware of the potential for the operators to cut & run.
Exchanges seems to have become a market created mechanism in the bitcoin space, so each of can decide the extent to which to risk our capital in such or to participate in such. Bitcoin would be a much different space without exchanges, but even if we could imagine a world without exchanges, we would not be dealing with the reality that exchanges exist, serve a function and have varying degrees of risk - some exchanges are likely more scrupulous than others, but at the same time there continues to be exchange risks (understood).
So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence? especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?
Questioning their solvency is rational whether one assumed malfeasance _or_ incompetence. The
evidence that they had a major loss directly backs this suspicion for this particular exchange.
Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.
Yeah right.. in other words you have no evidence beyond the fact that they were hacked in August and that their "hack" story in August was implausible in your view. In other words, some of their subsequent behavior to stay open, to not run away with the funds and to engage in various innovative pay back resolution carries little to no weight with you, and instead you want to focus on some narrow situation and lack of evidence for your current assertions.
