I didn't need to appeal to authority the first time I explained that address reuse was caused by people using deterministic seeds on two different devices:
Step 1 - Get shown blockchain evidence of Wasabi address reuse
Step 2 - Ignore said evidence
Step 3 - Ask for the evidence you've just ignored
Step 4 - Go to Step 1
We just agreed that address reuse is not a "critical flaw" since it can be done in any implementation like my Joinmarket and Samourai examples, and it can't be avoided by a client if a user has the same seed generating addresses asynchronously on multiple clients.
I'm asking you directly: What is wrong with the WabiSabi coinjoin implementation? I told you exactly what was wrong with the Whirlpool coinjoin implementation and then
I deanonymized the very first Whirlpool transaction ID you provided using the flaws I described,
why can't you deanonymize any WabiSabi coinjoins?