Ok, I keep making exactly the same point, and your explanation is defenately not good enough for me.

You keep saying that the way your mixer works makes it impossible for clients to discover other client's funds, what i see is one unspent output being re-used and re-used and re-used in transactions with one input creating > 2 unspent outputs. Since TryNinja told us that his 2 addresses were funded with the same transaction, I can only assume you're batching transactions to save on fees and you are using one wallet to pay out your customers. It looks a lot like you're topping off said wallet from an unknown source.
Offcourse, it's possible those transactions are internal transactions, but the way they're built, the mixing of the script types, the number of outputs,... makes me believe i'm right... Especially since TryNinja's both addresses were funded using exactly the same transaction.. It would be an incredible coincidence if his addresses were funded using one and the same transaction, making it very easy to link them together, but other client's privacy would be well protected?

You claim this source is "fresh coins", but no matter how deep i dig, i cannot find a coinbase reward popping up. You're selling "fresh coins", not mixed coins. On the other hand, you're delivering mixed coins, period.

When we talk about dust, i think we're using a different definition, that's why i put dust between quotes... When i talk about dust being used to top off your wallet, i'm talking about transactions like this one:
https://blockstream.info/tx/7e2191784780c350b607c42fef384711976a9ea11b7b71338ccb36c4c302e1e2
This is one of the transactions topping off your wallet... 39 unspent outputs being used, none of them actually fits the definition of dust, but i was merely talking about the fact this is a transaction is just merging a lot of smaller unspent outputs together... None of them coming from a mining reward. Once again, this could be a smart move from your part, but if i dig just one level deeper i see this transaction is funded with unspent outputs like this one:
https://blockstream.info/tx/78eb2a595bd24020194c78d89e469f1ef9d0ff69c61565f9f4eb62ed0f6eba49?output:2
funding p2sh, native segwit and legacy addresses, making it look like it's a payout from some service or exchange... Defenately not a miner. Once again, this could be a smart ruse, but i doubt it.

Now, my conclusion is very simple: you're not selling fresh coins. Either the algorithm is (at best) very similar to the other mixers out there OR you've found a way to make the transaction chain look exactly like a mixer using one wallet that's topped of from an unknown source (defenatly not a miner) to pay out his clients while in reality using some super-smart algorithm to actually protect your clients and your sources in a super-smart way.
I cannot prove what you're doing one way or another, but with the absence of any proof of actual coinbase rewards being used, and without proof that transaction chain is more than what it appears to be, i can only say the odds are pretty big that my assumption is correct.
Once again: no proof... I'm just saying that this is a classic example of occam's razor:
source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Occams-razor

This isn't a problem per-se, other than the fact that it's false advertisement to tell people you'll be using coinbase rewards (fresh coins) but in reality you're using the same algorithm as many of your competitors.  Honesty goes a long way.


I will leave you with an in real life fictional fiat equivalent of what you're doing:
I'm going to the philipines next week and I want to bring 5000 euro's cash with me. I've heared that the president of the philipines is very hard on drug offences, and i know most euro bills have traces of cocaine on them. Since i don't want to be arrested, i only want to bring certified clean money with me.
I meet you on the street. You tell me you have a hook up at the central bank that can provide you with 100% legal, freshly printed, never used 20€ bills... You tell me that if i give you 5100 euro's of my potentially cocaine-carrying euro bills, you'll give me 5000 euro's in never used bills in return.
The day arrives, I give you 5100 euro and you give me an enveloppe back. When i'm home, i open the enveloppe and find 4900 euro's in old, used bills.
Since you gave me an anonymous email address to contact you for more business, i shoot you a mail to complain... A couple days later i get following response:
"yes, i had 5000 euro's in sparkling new bills, but i wanted to protect my source at the bank, so i took those bills to the local coffeeshop (a dutch shop where they sell cannabis products). I gave him the 2500 euro's in new bills, and in return he gave me 2400 euro's from his cash register. I mixed those 2400 euro's with 2500 euro in new bills and gave them to you...".
Why on earth would you do this? I payed to get 5000 euro's in new bills, not 2500 euro's in new bills and 2400 euro's in bills that have even a greater potential of being tainted with drugs. I cannot take these 4900 euro's to the philipines.

Now, i'm pretty sure you'll twist this post around and find new ways of saying exactly the same thing... I'm going to step out of this thread since it's pretty clear you're not interested in showing any kind of proof, hiding behind the fact that you say you want to protect both your miners and your customers.
I personally think it would be pretty trivial to produce evidence, even if it means you'd have to re-clean a small portion of your funds... But hey, it's up to you if you want to be trusted or if you want to be yet another sketchy mixer that's only being used by people that know little or nothing about this ecosystem.

Piece out