Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 02:33:48 PM

Quote from: NeuroticFish on Today at 02:10:21 PM

* since members come and go the spreadsheet can become sooner or later almost public again if it isn't that everybody can see only his records
* this means that neither the CM nor the participants cannot be properly checked; and humans are inclined to cheat, you know...

As I mentioned above, I can see the argument for a public spreadsheet in short lived campaigns, those which have a high turn over of users, or those with untrusted managers. But in a stable campaign such as ChipMixer, which adds or removes users only a couple of times a year and is managed by a highly trusted manager, then I see no benefit. Whereas the benefit to privacy of not having one is significant.

Well, another use case is users sharing the link to others from outside. I would add that I was there on the use case of having a spreadsheet. The direction of not having any at all is... intriguing.
And I agree 100% that not having one at all significantly benefit on privacy. Just then there won't be any choice for scrutiny (of course, it can be debatable whether we need that or not).
Interestingly we may get from 2 spreadsheets (as now, although temporarily) to none (at least not publicly).

Quote from: PrivacyG on Today at 03:23:42 PM

What if Chip Mixer members gave Dark Star a list of 10 Addresses and Dark Star paid them weekly in a random Address from a Chip Mixer chip. Just an idea.

Not a bad idea, just it can be prone to mistakes, since as we stand now OP will have to handle correctly 540 addresses.
I would clearly not mid to get the coins sent to a private list of addresses.

---
However, private spreadsheet and private list of addresses... this can probably work at ChipMixer and maybe a handful of other campaigns, but in most cases (campaigns and campaign managers) it can become - sooner or later - the recipe for disaster.