Monerujo is great, have been a happy user for years (never caught the cake bug) but their recent integration of Exolix has me a little reserved. I'm still using it, but Exolix hasn't exactly had the beat reputation in the community, not changelly level bad, but they've held funds for KYC before, and they're not forthright about the details of how they claim these are for legal reasons and automated yet can somehow guarantee no KYC for monerujo users. I understand, swap services are what they are, people use them, aggregators like trocador and orangefren use even some sketchy ones and try to educate users on the risks, but still, to have a sketch one integrated directly into a Monero wallet application, I'm watching closely anday make changes.
Discussion
Yeah, I don't like these swap services being integrated at all, really. If I absolutely need to swap, I will use Trocador simply because I can see whether my trade will be insured or not.
Do you have specific information on Exolix capturing funds from s user? If that's the case we would request a statement from them.
And if it happens to a Monerujo user we want to be the first to know of course.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/j428i2/warning_exolixcom_has_been_advertising_here_and/
https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/11hgrl5/warning_exolixcom_cryptocurrency_exchange_kept_my/
Their ToS States that they reserve the right to block funds pending KYC.
My main concern is though, their ToS States that their KYC flagging procedure is automated, risk based and done when required by law. But I've asked them in several public places how they're able to offer you guys (and us, your users) KYC free swaps if that is true, and they never answer. Other people have also shown curiosity on this front to no avail. If you can get them to just answer that question and it isn't dodging or some bullshit I think I and others would be satisfied.
They're a company and they have to comply with the law to be able to operate.
Do keep us posted if you find any actual case of a Monerujo user with blocked funds.
So you don't even see my links to r/Monero? Not going to address it? "They have to comply with the law" except for your users, right? Explain that. I bet you won't.
It's one thing for you to say "monerujo isn't Exolix, we will look into claims and get them to respond to concerns" but you just shut me down with their talking points. That puts me off, I'll have to switch to cake now at some point.
*how can they guarantee monerujo users no KYC if they only do KYC when legally obligated to do so?* I didn't expect you to answer that question, I expected them to, but now that you're defending that with more bullshit, you've become obligated to explain it as well. I bet you that you won't.
That's right. Monerujo isn't Exolix. We don't see inside their black box. If you notice something wrong, please report with evidence so we can take a look.
It's great that there's nostr:nprofile1qqsfzszrtw60ut24h28k0qy3cdyxhvpp2zx4lwyqzdfm7xwjsaxsj2qpremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59ucn4qhy so you have a choice. Same thing happens the other way around. There's also Stack just in case you get put off by the two of us. Mysu and Anonero too.
Weird that you think we're obligated to anything, specially since you see clearly how you're not obligated to use Monerujo. Freedom goes both ways.
I didn't think you were obliged to answer for Exolix, until you decided to answer for Exolix by saying "they're a company and they have to follow laws" which is bullshit. Why is it bullshit? It's bullshit because...
*how can Exolix promise not to KYC Monerujo users if their KYC is only done to comply with the law?*
If you don't wan to be held to that, next time maybe say something like "we will ask them to answer that question for themselves". Of course, I suspect you would've done just that, except that you know the answer to the question.