I'm not sure where they first mentioned 'ultimate solution for Bitcoin privacy', but I have confirmation in their reply to my 10th question:
There is also this:
Wasabi is the Bridge to Bitcoin Fungibility.
In order to reach its long-term goal of becoming a universal currency, bitcoin needs to acquire two qualities that are essential to every form of sound money: privacy and fungibility. In the case of privacy, it’s important that the identities of the BTC transaction sender and receiver remain unknown to every unwanted third party.
And by joining forces with a blockchain analysis firm, everyone's privacy will be preserved.

For fungibility, every bitcoin amount needs to have the same degree of acceptance for payments, regardless of the money’s origins.
To make that happen, certain UTXOs will not be allowed in zkSNACKs' CoinJoins because they are not good enough.
CoinJoins are a great way to increase the privacy of bitcoin senders, as they break the link between the current owner and the previous transactions.
Not true for the default zkSNACKs coordinator.
The combined power of the non custodial experience, the automatic routing of the internet connection via Tor, the sovereign setup which puts users in control of their public key without having to trust a third party and the easy CoinJoins still makes blockchain analysts scratch their heads in an attempt to make guesses.
With Wasabi 2.0 and zkSNACKs, it will be much easier for our blockchain analysis partners to make those guesses.
Last but not least, the issue of zkSNACKs' censorship-friendly CoinJoin coordinator needs to be addressed.
To zkSNACKs, the main priority is to be able to incentivize the 80+ developers and code contributors to keep on working towards building the best privacy wallet technology.
Obviously.
Wasabi 2.0 bridges regulated institutions and cypherpunks. It bridges privacy advocates with the software that they’re going to want to use to coordinate their own mixes. And ultimately, it bridges privacy and fungibility. Thanks to Wasabi 2.0, bitcoin might just become as private and fungible as physical cash.
I see! I haven't tried it myself, but it would be interesting to know whether blacklisted inputs are marked as such / if there's any GUI for it or whether users just get a (presumably) generic error message.
I doubt the message would highlight the fact that your UTXOs are blacklisted or dirty and that you can't use those coins for that reason.
<Snip>
That quote should be assigned to dkbit98, not n0nce.