I want to get an answer to this question from the community of Bitcoin.
The opinions on fungibility go like this:
- No: Many places buy the "taint" nonsense and treat bitcoins unequally. Therefore, you might be discriminated based on your coins' history.
- Yes: No matter the history, 1 BTC = 1 BTC, always. The protocol doesn't treat them differently, and we shouldn't interact with businesses that enforce this "taint" notion, which is evidently based on inaccurate fallacies.
I'm personally on the latter group. Third parties can treat them however they like. They're just losing me as client. Decentralized solutions treat all coins equally, as they should.
In the Monero community, there is a prevailing perspective that due to these businesses, Bitcoin is not fungible, and Monero is. My question is: have you ever paid a business that buys the "taint" nonsense with Monero? Does it make any sense to enforce this BS while accepting a completely private currency that you cannot track? In my view, if a business performs blacklists on my bitcoins, it absolutely doesn't accept Monero. You either accept both Bitcoin and Monero as fungible, or you blacklist the former and delist the latter (due to your inability to track it).
If we go to literal meaning of fungible that yes BTC is fungible because it can be replaced by another BTC and both are equal in worth and value but the fact that it can be replaced makes it fungible.
Now if we talk about with facts and brain then the term fungible has no place in crypto world. What I mean to say is why someone will replace a BTC by BTC there is no point to that. No coin is fungible if we come out of the literal meaning.