Quote from: Janyiah201 on June 30, 2022, 11:44:21 PM

If you take a look at exchangers list, most of them are with 0 (ZERO!) negative reviews, because if you post negative review they invite the exchanger to comment and all that exchanger have to to is to click "cancel claim" and your negative review becomes a comment.

We don’t have a notion of a “negative review” on our website, the red marks unsolved financial claims to the service. Maybe it’s not the most obvious UX-design, but our service is over 15 years old, out of which for 13 years it has been exactly in this design and loyal users know about this feature.

Quote from: Janyiah201 on June 30, 2022, 11:44:21 PM

Some exchangers, like Changelly, next to it's name have icon which shows:"This exchanger can require verification of client's documents", meaning that they might ask for KYC.

But when other exchangers who does not have this icon ask for KYC, freeze the money, like in MY CASE, they won't do anything and they will take exchangers side because they are the ones who are paying them.

The icon is obligatory only if KYC is obligatory for every (or for the absolute majority) of transactions. It there are random KYC-check for transactions with high level of AML-risk, we don’t make exchangers set this icon. However, we always urge users to get acquainted with the exchange rules before the operation, after coming to the exchanger’s website.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 07:31:36 AM

Unfortunately, BestChange supports the anti-Bitcoin idea of "taint", and like most (or all) companies that do so, they don't state that on their website.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 07:31:36 AM

BestChange supports the (crazy) idea that 1BTC≠1BTC, which is a huge threat to Bitcoin and it's users.

Please understand that AML does not threaten the integrity of bitcoin ecosystem as such, but it only limits the work with gateways between the traditional financial system and the crypto world. Whether you want it or not, but if you wish to exchanger bitcoin to dollars or rubles, you have to be so kind as to comply with the rules for handling fiat currencies, and they imply a tough policy of AML legislation in many countries of the world. With that, if you make deals within the crypto community nobody and never will censor your operations, this is the essence of decentralization.

Meanwhile, you want to shift the principles of decentralization to centralized services, such as exchanges, exchangers and simple shops operating in KYC-enabled jurisdictions. This position is quite popular and understandable, but it is fundamentally wrong and contrary to the laws of many countries.
Use bitcoin within cryptocurrency ecosystem, and don’t try to exchange it to fiat currency, then you won’t have to complaint at “AML-discrimination”.

Quote from: icopress on Today at 10:49:25 AM

Knowing the mentality of the country in whose jurisdiction such a legal exchanger is opened, I can say with 100% probability that not a single confiscated amount will be transferred to the authorities under any circumstances. Those legal legal clippings they refer to are a formality, as the letter of the law requires them to do so. Not to mention the nominee directors of this exchanger (as is often the case).

When funds are frozen on an AML basis, the jurisdiction of the exchanger itself rarely plays a role, because they often follow instructions from the custodial service that they use to receive and store cryptocurrency. Such services are subject to all international AML legislation of the countries in which they operate (in fact, all world). Therefore, your references and hints are inappropriate.

Quote from: NeuroticFish on Today at 11:22:48 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 09:42:55 AM

Note that the feedback has been bumped 48 times: BestChange allows the exchanger to cancel the claim (this happened 20 times). Then, Janyiah can renew the claim (which happened 19 times). That alone is very shady: imagine if any user on Bitcointalk could turn their negative feedback into neutral just by clicking it.

This is indeed a system that can be abused by the exchanges. Not good.

Thank you for having paid attention to this problem. But we would like to remind you that we don’t have “negative reviews”, we only have “financial claims”. This is why we have an automatic system that switches the exchanger off when it has several active claims. We understand that this is a somewhat old-fashioned scheme of work with financial claims, but it was implemented for the sake of protection from "consumer terrorism" in the absence of our moderators.

Currently, our staff number has increased sufficiently to process the majority of these cases manually, that’s why we are already working on changing this system — soon exchangers will have a very limited number of attempts to lift a claim on their own, without our interference. Please wait for this update, we are already thinking about all the details.