First up, I use Mt Gox, but keep balances in BTC/dollars as low as makes no difference if it all vanished.
We all rushed into this happy anarchistic world of 'our money' without big brother looking over our shoulder with glee and excitment - the shackles falling from our feet.
The relished the startup trading sites and the idea of shadowy Keyser Soze masterminds lurking behind the scenes making out like bandits.
The moment something goes wrong, we all immediately start reaching for our pitch-forks, demanding regulation and over-sight and bleating about our consumer rights.
Nobody apart from me seeing any irony in this?
I assume the next step is that the exchanges will be stressing that they're based in the US, comply to all US laws, are audited by the banking authorities and withdrawals are only allowed upon the recipient faxing in a copy of their passport..
Either bitcoin is free-market-anarchy, Mt Gox can do what they want and we decide whether we want to use them, or another site, following this - we have the right to choose, but that's about it.
Or we regulate the arse out of it and make the entire thing pointless.
Possibly the (good) outcome is that it'll just fragment the trading market - you want to use the one that charges 1% on transactions and under-writes your cash, or the nice scuzzy one that runs in Belize.
My understanding of what happened at MtGox was that somebody hacked their way in, got a load of BTC, flogged them all trashing the market and then found out they could only pull out $1000 of their BTCs?
If this is the case, rolling back everything seems the only sensible thing to do - with MtGox covering any of the coins/cash that left their little ecosystem out of their own pocket.
Assuming the limit on withdrawal is $1000 with of BTC though, was that worked out on the average over the last 24/48 hours, or at the last traded price the market was pushed down to?
Anyway, I've wondered away off the topic now.