@jrhonk23 reported that Bittrex apparently had an unannounced wallet lock-out in response to the proposed hard and soft forks of the Bitcoin blockchain. If accurate, this strikes me as supremely unethical. Not the lockout itself, necessarily, but the unannounced nature in which it was implemented seems suspect.
I would like to point out sites that in contrast appear to be approaching the matter in an honest, upfront manner.
Coinbase has had a banner notification with a link to their UAHF/UASF FAQ page for a while now, and has announced in advance what their policy will be, warned that lockouts will occur in the future, and advising users to move their holdings to an outside account if they want it available during the lockout period.
From their FAQ page:
The UAHF will functionally create two different versions of Bitcoin. In contrast, the UASF will likely not create another version of Bitcoin. However, the UASF may initially cause instability on the Bitcoin network. To ensure the safety of customers’ funds, we will temporarily suspend BTC deposits, withdrawals, and buy/sell starting approximately 4 hours before activation of either fork. If:
(a) you wish to access your coins on the UAHF chain, or
(b) you want to ensure you can access your funds immediately while the UAHF/UASF forks are happening,
you should withdraw your BTC from Coinbase to an external wallet address under your control by July 31.
This strikes me as a reasonable response, and proper communication is provided for account holders. The expanded explanation in the rest of the FAQ give sme confidence that the company is trying to responsibly address their stewardship obligations to their members.
Freebitco.in has a smaller statement on the hard fork, which I will reproduce below in its entirety.
HARD FORK STATEMENT
Recently, there have been discussions about the possibility of a bitcoin hard fork happening so we wanted to address the issue for users who have their coins stored with us.
If there is a hard fork, we shall always follow the longest chain (the chain with the most proof of work) as our primary coin. Bitcoins on the secondary chain however, will be made available for withdrawal by users after there has been a clear winning chain. So for each satoshi that users have with us, they will receive 2 (or more if there are multiple forks), one on the longest chain and one in the minority chain/s.
If there is a chance of a hard fork being successful and causing disruption to the network, we shall pause all deposits and withdrawals before the scheduled hard fork time and resume them only after there has been a clear winning chain.
This faucet site also seems to be making sure to warn users about upcoming changes and how it could affect account accessibility. Again, this increases my confidence in the site management.
What has been your experience with the current blockchain fork unrest, or previous forks? Which sites handle it well, and which keep users in the dark? Please comment below!
Well, I'm pretty sure when people registered for their exchange, they agreed to the terms and conditions of that exchange. And those terms allow exchanges to decide what transactions are allowed or not. I agree that Coinbase has been much nicer and more communicative, however Coinbase lost a lot of money when ethereum hard forked, which is probably why they care so much now, I'm not sure it's about being honest/communicative...
About Bittrex being unethical: if their terms and conditions stipulate they can do what they did, there's nothing wrong with this.
BTW:
But companies that learn from past mistakes and strive to offer more transparency to their customers should be acknowledged, and those that don't need market pressure to reform.
agreed.
This actually seem interesting!
Thank you for sharing this valuable information.