Quote from: philipma1957 on Today at 12:16:18 AM

Quote from: aurel57 on December 08, 2023, 06:58:53 PM

Maybe a stupid question, but can't the lightning network actually be considered a mixing service?

Maybe and maybe coinjoin.

No, "the LN" can never be considered such a service, because: first, it isn't a "service" but a decentralized P2P network or software solution, and 2) it doesn't meet the criteria that "it" can steal property in the mixing process.

If I interpret theymos' rules correctly, then not even a LN node which advertises itself as a mixer could be considered one (according to this policy), because it cannot steal property if the user does everything right -> this means in the case of Lightning, that they control the channel and closes it if the counterparty tries to post an old state.

This may be seen by some as a loophole but for me it actualy isn't: all Lightning nodes have these privacy-protecting qualities, and thus no mixer can really make a "business model" out of it (for example, charging higher LN fees). Of course, it's possible that many Lightning nodes collect data for blockchain analysis, but a node advertising itself as a "mixer" that "doesn't do that", can do that too, as an user, you can't "see" the difference.

I'm not a CoinJoin expert but I believe with CoinJoin the situation is very similar.

Quote from: theymos on December 08, 2023, 10:19:32 PM

Sorry, but having official mixer representatives do that sort of thing is too problematic, so that won't be allowed. But a non-mixer-representative creating an "ASDFMixer discussion thread" would be OK.

Thanks for the clarification, I think I can live with that restriction if a discussion about mixers and thus at least user-to-user help (without mixer representatives being involved), either in a dedicated thread or in a general "thread about mixers" continues to be allowed. I can sort of understand your problem with mixer representatives; it could be a risk for the forum (even if I believe it won't, if advertising is strictly banned), so it's a classical tradeoff.