Which coins were sent to Binance?

That's completely misleading. If anybody failed it was the hacker who stopped the mixing process after 1 coinjoin, then merged enough outputs and reused addresses to make it easy to identify them. There wasn't any toxic change in the coinjoin, only coins with lower anonymity scores which would have undergone further mixing had they not interrupted it or used custom settings that are weaker than any of the default mixing options.

Kruw has been endlessly copy and pasting a post of his and spamming it across multiple threads where a user has deliberately consolidated unmixed change outside of Whirlpool as "proof" that Whirlpool is flawed. But when someone is tracked through a Wasabi coinjoin, it's entirely the user's fault and nothing to do with Wasabi?

Peak double standards.

That's where it starts in my opinion, and it will open a can of worms. Because what if the most popular wallets also started implementing warnings and alerts that the inputs coming in their wallets are "possibly tainted"? How would that make the users feel and what would they do? Those coins would be sold right away, and if enough users are "warned/alerted" by their wallet app, it's probable that "tainted" Bitcoins would be valued less than "clean" Bitcoins.

I believe Lightning's real value propostion is in user privacy and fungibilty, not cheap and fast transactions. Isn't there an update that makes the opening of channels look like regular transactions? Users will value such a network and will pay the necessary fees, which will also incentivize Lightning routing nodes.

Yes, I already mentioned the economic incentive compatibility of privacy before:

For an outside observer, it might be. But their blockchain analysis partner, the one they don't want us talking about, might know more than us. Who knows, maybe their deal involves helping the enemy de-anonymize users of particular significance who have been targeted for de-anonymization. Oh boy, now I am going to hear about how Wasabi is open-source again.  

That's what you claim and want the public to think. I'm not saying the opposite is true, but I also don't trust you, Wasabi, or zkSNACKs. Blockchain analysis didn't strike this deal with zkSNACKs to be fed useless data they can't do much with and monetize. There could be something more there that the general public isn't supposed to know about. 

Now this discussion makes me wonder.  Is there any body who audited the code?  Some body who is not paid by Wasabi or Kruw I mean.

Pmalek, Kruw telling the truth is of course never a thing that is going to happen.  I do not believe Kruw or Wasabis team thinks BA is doing any thing good to Wasabi or Bitcoin.  Anyway.  Whether they think or not is just as bad.  If they think it is doing any good then they are straight up our enemy.  If they do not think so then they are huge liars to be avoided.

Kruw asks very malicious questions and it shows their true intentions.  He stated something and I asked two yes no questions which he has been avoiding for a week now,

And the radio silence is showing how cunning this Wasabi team can be.  I say Wasabi team including Kruw because there is no way some body spends this amount of time defending Wasabi without a correlation to their team.

I did not ever believe there would be some body in the Bitcoin world who I could put above Craig Wright on the list of people I would never trust.  It looks like I found a winner.

But maybe the questions have not been answered because Kruw either ignores my replies or put me on his Ignore List.  If some body else could ask them for me I would be appreciative.

My assumption:

Reality:

Better late than never I guess. You missed to mention that immediately after my comment, but it's good that you remind us about the open-source nature of your software while having a love affair with the enemies of privacy. 

Of course he is connected to the team. He is on Bitcointalk to salvage the situation as best as he can and steer the conversation in directions that best suit Wasabi and himself.

I don't think you are on ignore. He replies to BlackHatCoiner and o_e_l_e_o when they say something. And they were the first to be called thieves and scammers by him. He replies to me as well, and I was also a scammer and thief at some point in the future, but I am not hearing that as much lately. He probably forgets to point that out.

Whose devs? Wasabi's? If there was something in the code that shouldn't be there, you are not going to hear it from them. They would have put it there.