AHBL and TOR

[Paul Syverson]

On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 03:33:54PM -0400, Michael Holstein wrote:
> 
> It was just a business decision on behalf of eGold .. I'm guessing their 
> risk analysis folks looked at the fraud numbers and saw a few too many 
> from addresses associated with proxies (as always, a few bad apples 
> spoil the lot...).
> 
> Ironic though, since eGold's claim to fame is making anonymous payments. 
> Why wouldn't they want someone to make an anonymous payment *anonymously*?
> 

I also find this a little surprising. Not just at an abstract business
plan consistencly level but from having talked to some of their folks,
although that was several years ago. Has anyone who is concerned about
accessing e-gold actually spoken to people at e-gold about this? It
could be this is just a configuration mistake, a bad iinterpretation
of policy by an admin, or it could be that they made a choice they can
articulate. There could be simple solutions to some real concern of
theirs short of blacklisting.  (In general there are almost always
better solutions.) But it would be worth finding out what they are
doing and what they are trying to accomplish rather than debating in
ignorance.

aloha,
Paul