TOS

MichaelAischmann

Idk what it takes. A governance proposal or for reddit to change their TOS.

Ninja_Gogen

Option to see your seed phrase and in the TOS something stating they can share your seed phrase with third party companies.

cryptdoh6

I should be receiving my first set of moons soon. I am a little concerned though because I’ve read that selling them for USD (or converting to another crypto that can be sold forUSD) is a violation of the TOS. However, I am not sure if this is really accurate, or perhaps the TOS have updated to allow it.

cryptdoh6

I should be receiving my first set of moons soon. I am a little concerned though because I’ve read that selling them for USD (or converting to another crypto that can be sold forUSD) is a violation of the TOS. However, I am not sure if this is really accurate, or perhaps the TOS have updated to allow it.

LatinumGirlOnRisa

yes, I didn't say anything about not knowing the TOS, all adults know that [or they should] if they have a credit card..I just don't agree that it's reasonable.

Puking_In_Disgust

Their crypto service is ass, but I’m more annoyed with their TOS practices. Basically if you come on their radar for any kind of controversy (and I’ve seen some cases where it’s a pretty mild opinion expressed), they reserve the right to make getting your money out of there an absolute nightmare at best, or straight up taking (iirc) like 2 grand. You or I will probably never have to worry about that, but it’s still a guillotine hanging up there. Maybe you walk past the wrong protest and there’s a video of it, or something along those lines, you never know…

leeharrison1984

After they tried to sneak in the TOS changes that would allow them to confiscate money as they see fit, I completely closed my account. I will never use PayPal again.

MichaelAischmann

Being on Arbitrum Nova does not help. The network is not popular with exchanges. We also have a relatively low volume & Reddits TOS against us.

Mr_Bob_Ferguson

Good enough for Reddit TOS, good enough not to declare as income on taxes. Disclaimer: Not financial advice.

Odysseus_Lannister

Well hello, Reddit TOS

ThatOtherGuy254

It's because they announced it on Twitter instead of sending an email. I don't remember the TOS requiring me to have a Twitter account to stay informed by Blockfi.

DankOcean

TOS-style rug-pull

_who_is_they_

Basically TOS is there to unperson you. Broke our TOS? That means we can censor you among other things.

BrocoliAssassin

The rich will always get their way. Tired of stupid TOS's that are always in favor of corporations. Hell, even if it is in favor for customers it still does not matter, just look at FTX. BlockFi was also charged with lying/misleading customers and guess you got all that money? The SEC and gov. NONE of it went to the customers. Quicker we all realize this is a rich mans game thats rigged for the rich the better we can get through the bullshit as best as we can.

JuggaliciousMemes

im surprised reddit doesn’t hit the downvote-spam accounts, i would think that would be considered vote-manipulation which is against reddit’s TOS

Giga79

Did you sign up for their newsletter, how did they get your email address? Their TOS state they do not sell your information. I'd take this up with them, and see what they have to say. Not so uncommon for an insider to violate company policy without the company knowledge.

comp21

A phone app that is open source has been checked by hundreds, if not thousands of programmers to verify there's no back door or even an app that simply has been around for years (mycelium for ex) and proven itself vs Robinhood that has shown itself many times (in its very brief history of existence) not to be trustworthy and has very clearly in their TOS a paragraph explaining you do not own anything on their app, you owe an iou from them to you for anything on their app... Sounds like good planning. You were better off claiming you're not handling your finances correctly because you're "not very good with computers".

kirtash93

Arbitrum Nova fees are so low that I dont even care moving stuff. It is awesome. I would be happy if Reddit just change their TOS.

dopef123

I'd say if you use customer funds and lend them out to basically yourself against the TOS that constitutes fraud. But I'm not a lawyer.

DowvoteMeThenBitch

Does it have to be Reddit endorsing the move for moons to be on exchanges? If there’s a grey market for a commodity, exchanges could choose to list on their own couldn’t they? It would be against Reddit TOS but that doesn’t mean Reddit has to enforce anything and it doesn’t make it illegal to sell on an exchange. Seems like there’s really no barrier except adoption.

Slamdunkdink

Sending or receiving from a gambling site on coinbase is a violation of their TOS. This will get your coinbase account closed.

DrakharD

Isn't this a same thing as me paying Amazon to use it's services. Amazon could not care less who the hell are you exactly if you pay and adhere to law and their TOS.

Dfranco123

This. I’ve been a Coinbase customer for 3 years now and have had great experiences. Even when I have an issues I email them and they resolve my issues within 1-3 business days. They aren’t the fastest, but they do get my stuff resolved. Try not to use a VPN this locks peoples account all the time. Do not send money to sketchy projects this also locks peoples account. Things like this is what people do not tell you since they have broken TOS from Coinbase that you SIGN when you accept using their platform. Even having the Coinbase card and going into a gun shop will lock your account. People just don’t read the TOS. Which is mind boggling if you invest money in a platform…

MichaelAischmann

To me this sentence is a collection of lies. Thanks for finding the relevant part of the TOS.

90DayF

[TOS.](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/beta-terms-of-service) “Community Points have no monetary value (i.e., are not a cash account or equivalent), cannot be sold to other users, and cannot be exchanged for cash or for any other goods and services outside of Reddit’s virtual goods or services.”

MichaelAischmann

What exactly in the TOS speaks against a CEX listing? So far I thought we just don’t have enough volume for a bigger exchange to care about Moons.

90DayF

I doubt that will happen with any of the big CEXes due to the Reddit TOS :(

conceiv3d-in-lib3rty

A CEX would have to go thru reddit, it’s their coin. There’s a whole process with getting listed. reddit’s TOS states that the coin has no monetary value.

kirtash93

They will eventually add community tokens as a payment but I think we will have to wait until there are clear regulations and Reddit to change the TOS.

Yurion13

or predatory TOS (Terms of Service) that we have to agree to when we sign up to open an account. But his lies on his youtube weekly AMAs should land him in federal prison for promoting a ponzi.

Acidhoe

Reading the article violates Reddit TOS section 8.1

CappucinoAtDawn

i'm 100% sure that reddit is already working on it, dont forget that moons are just a test for a much much bigger project. i believe that after changing the TOS of moons to have a value, reddit will accept it as a payment for some type of use. after moons having a Legit value, nothing will stop binance from listing moons. what do you guys think ?

SmoothGoing

My bank credits interest every month. FDIC insured side cash is earning interest. Not sure what it's got to do with gold or babies. What am I looking up in TOS?

ChemicalGreek

But Reddit says in their TOS that moons have no monetary value

jps_

This is how the law actually works, and why FTX and Celsius were a "big deal". Most of the folks holding accounts on exchange will be lucky to get pennies on the dollar when the dust settles. Remember "not your keys, not your crypto"? That is very true. When you deposit crypto with coinbase (or any custodial exchange), it's in an account controlled by their keys. That gives them what is called a right in title. In other words, it's actually theirs. In return, you get from them a right in contract. It's contractually yours (the contract is their TOS). Now... those TOS might say "it is your crypto", but that's just a contractual statement, which is read "as if". So title goes in fact to coinbase, and in contract to you "as if" it was in fact yours. But really it isn't. This works perfectly as long as Coinbase can satisfy all of its contracts. But a firm declares bankruptcy when it can't meet all of its contractual obligation when they come due. What happens if coiinbase goes bankrupt? A court has to decide which contracts get fulfilled, and in what order, from a fair distribution of all the firm's assets. That process consumes many many billable hours of many lawyers. Which eats away at the assets. Often until there is nothing left. And at the end there is agreement on how much of what would have been there could have gone to everybody. Then the lawyers get paid, the trustees get paid, the secured creditors get paid... and if there's anything left, everyone left gets a fair share proportionate to what "could have" gone to them. But even if your were 20 million in crypto was 2% of deposits when they had a billion on deposit, if at the end all they have is $100, you get your 2%, or $2. Good luck with that. There are ways they can create a legally defensible trust, or a third party depository, which segregates your assets from theirs. Indeed, they would be required to do so if they were compliant with securities exchange laws. But they aren't doing this. So, yes, your understanding is correct. Not your keys, not your crypto.

jps_

Again, you are arguing with the express intent not to learn. >Yes so obvious that lawyers and politicians and the head of the SEC can’t agree on anything It may not have occurred to you, but every time two lawyers who are doing their job start out not agreeing with each other. And at least one of them is proven wrong. Pointing at lawyers arguing as evidence of anything is kind of foolish. Lawyers argue. It's what they do. That's half the fun of the profession. As for agreeing with the SEC... Yea, the whole point when you get a Wells notice is to argue the crap out of it, otherwise you are going to be found criminally liable for something, and be forced to disgorge profits. So of course you pay lawyers to argue. Whether or not you are guilty. And just remember: every criminal who has a lawyer pleads not guilty. >Asking for guidance is so they don’t break the rules, not because they’re already breaking them. You've drunk the koolaid. Maybe just for giggles go actually read their lawsuit, and their petition for rule making, and the guidance SEC published in July 2019 back when they started to ask.. which, by the way, they didn't like (you'll read all about that in their petition). They aren't asking for guidance so that they can start operating an exchange. **They are already operating an exchange**. Just not in a way that is compliant with the rules for which they are asking clarity and arguing (through lawyers, not necessarily factually) either aren't clear, or don't apply. If you don't like that, perhaps you'd like to ponder for a second which function of an exchange you think they aren't currently doing that they'd really really like to do, once they get clarity on the rules that they have to follow. Think carefully now... what do you think they aren't doing that they'd like to do? Oops. As far as whether what they are doing is fully compliant now? Of course not. And it's obvious. At least obvious to anyone who isn't intent on not admitting it. You just have to read their TOS and compare your rights in their TOS to your statutory rights under the act, and you know right away their TOS is giving you the short end of the stick. And they are right now at the Supreme Court arguing that their TOS should be binding. Again, that's just lawyers arguing, and not agreeing. But not necessarily right. We'll see how the Supreme Court rules. >Wow, it’s so obvious I don’t know how all these politicians and lawyers and companies debating the matter have missed it! SEC didn't miss it. There's a wells notice. You are well ahead of a process that grinds very slowly. Coinbase of course wants to pretend it doesn't exist for as long as possible. And then when that's unavoidable, they will pretend that it was not criminal. And pay a fine. It's the dance. But if you don't know the steps of the dance, it can be hard to follow. Because it isn't a fast dance. It's a dance that takes years. >You should try to get the next president to appoint you chairman next. Neither you nor whoever that future president is have any idea who I am. Not to mention that I have no desire to take such a thankless job. It's bad enough arguing against Redditors who are wilfully closing their eyes and trying not to see things. But much more fun than anything at SEC.

jps_

>What rule exactly do you think they are not following? How about the custody rule, for which they asked guidance. It's damn clear they aren't. How about you go read their terms of service. Did you know that it's illegal for a regulated exchange to force consumers to agree to arbitration? Yeah. They are so far off the reservation it's obvious to anyone who understands how the law works. You can argue your naive point of view until you are blue in the face, but it won't change the facts. >please specify which crypto they are allowing on their platform that is a security. Teach us dummies Third party staking my friend. Coinbase Earn. Think about it a bit. I give them ETH (or dollars, or BTC or Dodge, or whatever). In contract (their TOS are a contract) they promise me a return on investment, vis-a-vis APR. They do all the staking (the work, being done by others). And I expect a profit. Presto, all four prongs of the Howey test, right there. It doesn't matter if it's done in software, or if they call it a token, what matters is the four elements of the Howey test are fully made out. It's not the ETH that's the security. It coinbase's contract that's the security. There's a reason Kraken abandoned its staking service, and it wasn't because it wasn't profitable.

ChemicalGreek

Also don’t forget these are in the TOS of exchanges, so basically everyone agrees with this when they use their services! Always take your crypto out of an exchange to self custody just to be safe.

jps_

This looks like smokescreen to me. On the surface, it's being cast as a debate whether or not Coinbase needs to behave like an exchange that handles securities, or a business that can do whatever it wants based on TOS it can write itself. The former is not nearly as profitable as the latter. I also think that coinbase's suit is really playing to the court of public opinion, and setting up judicial notice of a defense to *criminality*, but not really to one of wrongdoing. The reason is simple. Coinbase *is* out of bounds. The question is not whether they are or they aren't. It's how far, and it's whether it's deliberate and criminal or just a big confusing misunderstanding. This is an aspect of law few people understand, but it's likely a mechanism to get away with a fine and a slap on the wrist, and a reengineering of what they are doing, but to keep as much of the profits as possible. Criminality means disgorgement, and a bunch of other things, and that would be very bad for business. But make no mistake: they are out of bounds and will ultimately come in bounds. So all this is really a tussle over how long they can stay out of bounds, and how much they get to keep from their time out of bounds.

jps_

This is but one of several theoretical "long-tail" risks that exchanges face. It's called a long-tail risk because it's very unlikely to happen. So the odds of it happening tomorrow are pretty much nil. Unfortunately, one of the other characteristics of long-tail risks is that over the long term, it *does* happen. Odds close to zero multiplied by something approaching infinity will eventually exceed 100%. And humans are very very bad when it comes to intuitively assessing long-tail risk. Particularly long-tail risk that compounds. Who would have thought that all these smart VCs would have advised all their clients to risk their most friendly bank by withdrawing funds and triggering a bank collapse... of their bank? If they'd just kept their money there, and told all their portfolio firms to ride it out instead of withdrawing, SVB would still be in operation today. Hurting, but not restructured, and likely still solvent. It wasn't insolvent until smart money outsmarted itself. And now the startup economy is screwed long-term because no bank is going to be willing to take as much risk in that sector again. And it happened in less than 24 hours. Long tail risks are like that. If any of these risks materialize and it topples the exchange, then all these kinds of contractual obligations become creditors in a queue, and that's when all hell breaks loose. Each one won't happen tomorrow. But some day, something will. It may be after we're all dead and gone. Or it may be next month. Long tail risk is also like that. There's a reason that regulated exchanges are required to segregate assets. There is also a reason that regulated exchanges aren't allowed to have TOS that force arbitration or give them arbitrary powers to withhold your assets. Or act as issuers and brokers and custodians of risk-based investment instruments (aka securities) that can be commingled and/or leveraged. Make no mistake about it, Coinbase is not fighting the SEC because the rules around exchange regulation are unclear. It's fighting the SEC because it really doesn't want to be bound by the rules.

Calm_Lemonade

I disagree. I can’t put a date on it but I believe it’s possible. The top 100 simply isn’t ridiculous to me. Now if you say top 25 or something then yeah. But the top 100 is, currently, about 360M+ market cap. That’s no where near what the examples you mentioned (Doge,Shiba) went to. The Reddit TOS definitely holds us back but they’re already on 2 exchanges anyway so what’s the difference between right now and them being listed on more exchanges? The acknowledgment of their “value”? No one cares. No one cares, now. We can’t act like coins can’t rise to popularity.

lj26ft

Really so Coinbase was forced to Delist? They didn't go back and change their TOS that now says they won't delist without a court order. You're a clown along with Brian Armstrong and CONbase

J0nx77

He looks like those giant brain aliens in the first episode of Star Trek TOS. Intellectually he is probably smarter than them if he would use his powers for good.

Puking_In_Disgust

Nah, iirc that’s against some kind of TOS so that one went down the memory hole pretty quick lol

Rastifar

They would never give you the private key, and there's somewhere in the TOS you signed with them that they aren't obligated to do so. Does Robinhood supports polygon network? If not, that's why they consider them "lost", they have no way of accessing them and doing anything with them.

IncompetentSnail

I wouldn't be surprised if it's in the TOS.

Adventurous-Lynx-660

Read TOS i guess ?

Slade_Duelyst

the TOS might be, i wouldnt know, i just know using the platform for the last 6 years has been ezpz

zack14981

Reddit TOS prevents moons from being listed on exchange I’m pretty sure.

Jaxelino

I know GDPR is a european only thing, but its point is to make the company that held your data to erase it. It's hard to imagine they can freely give away strictly personal data as not even US TOS are that bad. If that's the case, a GDPR request would be akin to deleting your history. Even if nothing was done and someone has data that says that you have access to certain coins, what exactly can they do about it? They can only take it away from you in borderline dystopic ways, and even then they might fail to do so. Any plan to seize people's bitcoin is simply unfeasable. The only thing I can think of is for governments to punish bitcoin hodlers in other forms, but then again this would infringe on one's rights from the "speculation" that you're holding coins. What if you lost the keys and no longer have access to them, how are they going to prove or disprove that? There's no way

Probably_notabot

That’s a good point. The TOS would need to be revised probably. With Reddit IPO and rumors of exchange interest though, anything is possible

HighBuyGuy

They are eventually going to have to come to terms with their own TOS. Time to grow up, Reddit!

OneThatNoseOne

A bit shady to be that Paypal also used eToro with their crypto trading. Not sure how it is now but it used to be that you could only buy crypto with Paypal e-wallet through eToro. We know Elon was one of the early pioneers of Paypal. My last read of Paypal TOS was that Paypal never disclosed their 'crypto partner'. If we find out it's a ring of 'old friends' scratching each others backs out there don't say I didn't warn you.

JuggaliciousMemes

every exchange stealth-changed their TOS, locking up every moon permanently in their accounts

JuicySpark

Yes, the TOS that says don't post images

BrocoliAssassin

The USA is known for not prosecuting the wealthy. Just look at that shithead from Wolf of Wall Street. He did a few years in a prison that most people would consider a nice vacation. They also get the help cause of one line in 100000 pages of TOS. And even with the TOS is good like FTX it still doesn’t matter, the people still get screwed. Just go look at Celsius and Voyager and those CEO’s are protected as well. It’s basically legal stealing. Even with all the lies in advertisements and out of their own mouths it doesn’t matter. But boy, I bet if it was you or me that did something similar to just 1 person we would be in some deep shit. I think you’re basically right about the banks.Stuff like this is why I grew up not trusting the government and why I hate most politicians on either side. Theres a 2 tier justice system in the USA and until that gets fixed all this will keep on repeating.

parsnipofdoom

so for the record thigs looks like a terrible game, and I can't translate I thinkl its chinese. But right from their TOS page (j) nothing you do on or in relation to the Madhead Service and/or the Content will transfer any intellectual property rights to you or license you to exercise any intellectual property rights; and 6.3 Virtual Money is a category of Content, so the purchase of Virtual Money grants you only a limited, non-transferrable and non-sublicensable license to use such Virtual Money to access and purchase Virtual Goods. You acknowledge and agree that: (a) you do not acquire any ownership rights or property rights in or to the Virtual Money, Virtual Goods or other virtual Content; (b) Virtual Money and Virtual Goods have no monetary value and do not constitute actual currency or property of any type; (c) Virtual Money may be redeemed only for Virtual Goods and can never be sold, transferred, or exchanged for “real” money, “real” goods or “real” services from us or anyone else; https://imgur.com/a/wKqp8SB Its spelled our clear as day that you don't own your items in this game. Is it in chinese that they're advertaising ownership? Otherwise it looks like you assumed ownership here..

TedW

I'm not saying your CEX will go under, but if it ever gets hacked, that TOS probably won't help you. Can't squeeze BTC from a bankruptcy.

wsjwong

A lot of games advertise like that. I do admit that I don’t read those TOS and maybe they have said that there. But as a normal game player, now I realized so I don’t pay money for those games anymore and just play those that I can own and transfer freely.

parsnipofdoom

No one in gaming advertises you own the items you purchase, no where. If anything it’s spelled out clearly in the TOS, that you’re granted a license to use said item. So please show me a game ascertaining “ownership”

SetoXlll

They can’t it’s on Reddit’s TOS

I_AM_MORE_BADASS

Lol This is an especially centralized coin. Yeah, TOS violations worry me.

I_AM_MORE_BADASS

I dunno. TOS says Moons have no value. It's hard to deny we've ascribed them a value with shit like this going on.

lj26ft

The part where in the TOS they're supposed to not have any value..uh oh

RockEmSockEmRabi

From the TOS “Reddit may modify or elect to discontinue support for Vault, Verified Virtual Goods, or any other Features that are powered by blockchain technology, at its sole discretion, and those modifications may remove or add functionality”

RandomJoe7

How often are you gonna repeat a false claim? The Mod you keep referencing is a community mod, not an employee, and he was acting according to the Terms of Service - as could any other user. The TOS have since been changed to not give cashback on business spendings (which is what this Mod did), and the Mod has since stopped using his plutus card for business spendings. Literally nothing about it was fraud or abuse or whatever else you keep saying.

SimbaTheWeasel

Most people aren’t familiar with the TOS on moons

Sylerb

Never heard of any TOS in the first place, does have something alarming in their Moon TOS?

teslaspyderx

Aren't people afraid of the TOS surrounding moons?

RandomJoe7

I (and others) have already explained. DaveTwice is a community mod, not an employee of Plutus. He did LEGITIMATE spending (not money cycling, abuse etc) to max out his cards to get max cashbacks. At the time of him doing so, it was completely fine to do so with "business spendings" and this was not against the TOS. DaveTwice has always openly stated (on discord for example) what he is doing, has there also asked Plutus employees if what he is doing is okay, and was confirmed that it was okay. ANY user, not just "the mod" was able to do this, and everyone got their cashback for this (including being able to withdraw it to your own wallet). Only towards the end of last year did Plutus officially change the TOS to exclude "business spendings", and from that point onward DaveTwice has STOPPED using his plutus card for business spending. So no, he did not receive "illegitimate" PLU, he didn't abuse anything, he didnt money cycle etc. At the time what he did was allowed and it was allowed for EVERYONE. The whole basis of your argument is based on a lie...

marekt14

According to the TOS, moons have no value. Therefore taxing that of no value makes no sense.

RandomJoe7

Your claim doesnt make sense. The mod in question is a community mod, not an employee. Also, anyone can spend 10's of thousands, as many do. This mod did legitimate spending to get his cashback. His spending came from business expenses, which up until a TOS-change at the end of last year was fair game for everyone, and everyone got their cashback for that. And since that TOS-change, that mod in question has NOT used plutus for his business expenses. Do you not know any of this information, or are you purposefully trying to mislead "the public"?

RandomJoe7

You don't need to keep receipts for 10 pound Sainsbury purchases. What Plutus is doing is making sure to stop abuse, not normal spending behaviour. Things that are/have been abused and are now being checked/people being banned for: getting cash from Aldi/DM ATMs etc (someone got 50k€ over time and got cashback on all of it until he got caught), people maxing out the card with giftcards and reselling them and pocketing the cashback, using Curve's "Go back in Time" feature to get PLU on purchases and then moving the same purchases over to another cashback card to get cashback there too, and people using their accounts for business use (which was okay up until end of last year, but since then there has been a TOS change which says it's for personal use only).

RandomJoe7

While Plutus definitely has it's "growing pains" from their growth the last year, and could definitely communicate changes etc better, I'm going to have to say the OP is speaking out of his ass on this one, the claims made here are NOT true or purposefully misleading. I've been using Plutus for a year and I've never had issues (other than some technical problems, a few days delay etc... due to changes with banking partner and what not). Plutus has basically not monitored cashback at all up until this point, they've now seen a lot of abuse happening (by people doing extreme and obvious fraudulent stuff), and they are halting the withdrawals for a week or so to go over the withdraws and identify the abusers and their patterns. I am perfectly fine with this, as this means PLU will be even more stable and have more longevity due to this. About the claims made in OP: 1) A community Mod (not an employee) of Plutus used his card for BUSINESS purposes. It wasn't fraud, it wasn't abuse, and up until end of last year, this was NOT against the Terms of Service. Since the TOS have been changed, this community Mod has also stopped using his card for said business purchases. This Mod has also always been extremely open about his spendings, has openly asked Plutus employees and was given the "okay". And like I said, since the TOS changed, he has also stopped using Plutus for his business purchases. Also there's a spending limit of about 100k a year or whatever it is, so even at 8% cashback, he didnt get "30k" as you claimed. 2) The Rules for other users are exactly the same. If someone did business spending before the TOS change, they're fine and have received their cashback for it. 3) Nobody is saying you need receipts for all your grocery spendings from months ago. They said they will be looking into fraudulent activity and checking weird spending patterns. Example: I heard of a guy getting over 50k€ cash from Aldi ATM over the course of 6-12 months, which is CLEARLY and OBVIOUSLY abusive/fraudulent. So yes, of course they have to check certain spending patterns with Aldi's and other shops like that, which allow you to withdraw cash when buying products from them. Same goes for people who have spent boatloads on gift cards to resell them, also buying said giftcards at Supermarkets etc. 4) Other than those types of patterns, they are also checking single big ticket items for validity. I assume most people have receipts for things that like. And just because they check and on a single instance you say "sorry, dont have that receipt anymore", I'm pretty confident you're not instantly gonna get banned, but only if you have very suspicious patterns and can't explain it reasonably. Again, I get the frustrations, delays and withdrawal halts are never seen as a good thing. But fact of the matter is, for the past year that I've been with Plutus, I've never not received my cashback, have only been asked for my receipt once (and was lucky to have it in that case as it was an online purchase), and I received my cashback for that as well. And for now we're gonna have to live with some withdraw delays until, as they say themselves, work on a more automatic/faster system that will get rid of said delays. Not everything is perfect at Plutus, they are swamped with work and there's still many features that can be improved upon, but to say they are a "scam", "ponzi" etc is ... a stretch and seems a bit targeted.

Pasukaru0

Where did you buy it? Read the TOS and fineprint of whatever service you used.

Schapsouille

A DAO coupled with an unliable foundation (sections 10 and 11 ot the TOS) is the new textbook setup for rugs and ponzis. Decentralized on paper only. No one is accountable, magic.

Aerocryptic

>You don't stop thinking of ideas due to back of a napkin hypothetical quasi legal advice lol yeah Reddit's TOS was obviously just a napkin hypothetical quasi legal advice too. Better wake up and stop dreaming about this shitcoin. Just enjoy while it lasts and don't forget to cash out before the wahles rug it

MaeronTargaryen

If Kraken didn’t list Moons after renting the banner for 6 days, they’ll never list them. They had the opportunity to do a slam dunk advertising-wise and didn’t. Liquidity is too low and Reddit has recently changed their TOS and reiterated that MOONS have no value

HoutopHout

We have already one exchange listed them and are staying lowkey with kraken listing them we will come in a bigger picture and there could maybe be problems with TOS indeed

I_AM_MORE_BADASS

Everyone says they want Kraken to list them, but do we really?. Isn't that in direct violation of TOS?

kirtash93

I am not the one making the rules. I just follow them to not be fucked in the future. Good luck trying to convince Hacienda with Reddit TOS.

AzzX

Hard to say with the Reddit TOS over Moons and the upcoming IPO.

Primary_Technical

Depends on reddit TOS

Odysseus_Lannister

Shhh we’re here to be angry! *grabs ol reliable pitchfork and doesn’t read TOS*

kickinfish

Honestly once coinbase got in bed with Plaid, I was out. Plaid is one hell of scary company. It's sad how no reads TOS anymore.

The_Chorizo_Bandit

I’ve heard this a lot and the answer as to why it’s not on an algorithm to track with price is that doing so would be Reddit admitting that moons have a real world value. This is something they state to be not true in their TOS and is something they are desperate to avoid, so that they don’t get regulated or sued.

zack14981

Most likely scenario is that Reddit makes their own and completely cannibalizes moons and/or just makes them completely against TOS.

cutsickass

20% of a $30 million market cap is $6 million, and that's before crashing the price with such a huge sale. At the end of the day it's that's much money for a company like Reddit. Hopefully they'll change the TOS.

HighBuyGuy

I think they are going to change the TOS

GabeSter

Why is an exchange subject to Reddit TOS. What is Reddit going to do to the exchange?

RoadHogKenny

They are not bound by the TOS. The TOS is for users of the site.

Sharp_Tank05

Ouch, I did not know that TOS. No exchange can list it. Then why are people here screaming for Kraken listing?

ChemicalGreek

If Reddit shuts it down to be honest. They have a beacon in their contract to shut down moons! The TOS also states that moons have no value and that trading or listing moons is forbidden. This means no big exchange would list us unless the TOS changes!

RoadHogKenny

Moons are currently still too low cap. People are also saying that Reddit’s TOS states that moons have no value but I don’t think that’s gonna stop any exchange from listing it if they really want to.

Available-Top-1160

You can do it p2p but be careful of being scammed. DYOR i don't know if its breaking steam TOS or not. I think you can do it with stream trade.

Zombie_SiriS

Careful, Ive been banned for saying the exact same thing. Reddit TOS and its different applications across subreddits is a fickle bitch.

jps_

Yeah, unfortunately similar logic also works for Fiat. In this case, the TOS say it's "your" money but again "as if", because they didn't do much to actually perfect client rights in title, just left it as a contractual obligation. Anything where you have a *contractual* right to something is at risk in bankruptcy. That relationship makes you a creditor. It may be secured or unsecured, but it's a creditor relationship.

marekt14

It was already said that TOS states that MOONs do not have any monetary value. But also, what's more profitable for a company: Burning a couple of magic internet money that they printed, aka $0 to them or $5

jps_

Aaah.. you have almost hit the nail on the head! >Those who had a positive account balance on FTX owned the assets, and FTX just held them as custody on behalf of the users (as per the T&Cs). This is common understanding, but is not in fact true. Generally, US law (& English Common law) distinguishes between rights in title, and rights in contract. Rights in title are those of an owner (what you can do with a thing that is yours). Rights in contract are obligations between persons: (I will do this, you will do that...). We recognize for example that you might own a car, and we might agree I can use it. Blockchain is a system of unambiguous title. IF (and only if) you have the keys to the account, THEN you hold title to the coin in that account. It's why we say "not your keys, not your coin"... **If coins are in an account where FTX knows the keys but you do not, then FTX has actual title.** Not just FTX, but Coinbase or Binance or whoever. They can claim in TOS that the coins are yours, but they aren't. Not unless they are in an account to which you hold the keys (and they aren't, because that would be self custody, and pointless to involve the exchange). There are some things they could have put in place, but there are a lot of things they could have done that they didn't do. But, next question "their TOS says they are mine? How does that work? That's a largely solved problem. If I have title to a car, I can hand the keys to my son and say "here son, this is your car". My son can then use it *as if* they have title, although I retain title. My rights are in title, my son's rights flow to him from me in contract. But if I die, it's my car and an asset of my estate. So FTX has right in title, and you have right in contract with FTX **as if** you held title, even though you do not. Where the smelly-not-quite-fertilizer hit the blades of the air-moving machine is FTX went bankrupt. And then its creditors (folks who have claims in contract) are entitled to divvy up the assets to which it has title. The law is pretty simple. The blockchain is the system of record for crypto, the coins are held in title by whoever can produce the keys to the address, FTX has the keys... presto: FTX has legal title. FTX contract with you ("**as if**") makes you a creditor. Along with everyone else. I might have missed where the TOS sets up an enforceable security right, but of course that's going to be something the lawyers for secured creditors are going to dispute. It's a good bet that FTX clients end up as unsecured creditors.

BrocoliAssassin

Over in the USA the trick is to make a 1000 page TOS and include one line saying they can steal all your money and that’s all they need. Government isn’t going to help anyone get justice. BUT While banks have insurance only up to 250k plastered all over the windows, big stickers, on pamphlets, advertising and so on. When they steal from everyone we all have to pay for it.