thank you Linus,
for responding constructively and with patience to my rude assumptions.
i am replying to cpunks too, as this is in the general interest and my
apology to you should be public.
i have two questions:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 12:29 AM, Linus Olsson
... We would love to not need to do the KYC if it where possible. But we can not risk going to jail for it. It's enough that one of us is there already :(
is this related to the lack of KYC? i had heard of some processors getting "strong arm'ed" by their parent banks into particular KYC requirements, but never to the extent that jail time was used to push KYC reform in a vendor or processor.
On bitcoins or crypto currency are that a niche market that is so small that moving over to something like that would topple Flattr over night. Proved by the minuscule usage when we supported it. Maybe they will be more widely adopted in 3-5 years and that we could do something with them then. If we still are around. And yes the people that created the bitcoin processor we used, BIPS probably where rather incompetent. Never the less did we get the stats we needed to decide it was not for us.
it does sounds like the problem is with BIPS and presentation. BTC is quite successful in many circumstances, and i hope that you don't let a bad experience with a bad processor forever taint your perspective. why did you pick BIPS instead of another? (the bank you're using?) best regards, and apologies for my rudeness,