Am debating what are the innate properties that constitute money. For the reasons stated in prior posts I do not consider privacy to be applicable to what makes good or bad money and do not see that as a factor towards driving adoption.
Privacy is not necessarily a property of money. Fungibility is a property of money though, and without strong legal guarantees of fungibility, it likely does require privacy because if you can trace "bad" or "good" coins then fungibility isn't there. Bitcoin currently doesn't have whitelisting/blacklisting, etc. (for the most part; there do seem to be some exceptions involving Coinbase, etc.) but as long as that concept is in play fungibility is a question.
i think privacy is an important aspect of money.
at least if you want it to be adopted by the broadest swaths of the population which you should. and that even means adoption by druglords and money launderers who absolutely need their privacy. not that i advocate those sorts of activities but that's unrelated to my point.
i also don't think Coinbase is a privacy destroyer except if you try to do something illegal with coins one hop away from them. as the coins spread out through the economy though it's extremely difficult to link illegal activity with those original coins.