So you prefer them to get funds to whatever custodian you deem secure? That would not require any disclaimers? "Your funds will be held in mint X. Read their TOS at x.mint/tos. If you want to change that, go to settings." That's the minimum you would have to put in place. The idea that custody on behalf of other people somehow could come without a moral obligation for such a kind of disclosure is wild. And of course, mints would have fees, so it's not unreasonable to also assume they would have some custody fees at some point.

So unless you are a complete psychopath you would want to be transparent to your users what would happen if you ever decided to shut down your mint or simply change the fees. This is TOS you would want to share even if you ran your mint behind TOR anonymously but I see little room for trust in an anonymous setting.

Pirate's "Bitcoin Savings & Trust" got a lot of trust as it worked for so many people but of course it was a Ponzi and took off with loads of BTC. Pirate even was part of the original Bitcoin torch that I can't find anymore. It was more than 10 years ago. Links welcome 🙏 . Anyway, ... I digress ...

The point is that mints will inevitably either be institutions or anonymous and by charging a fee we can nudge people to self- or fist-reach custody. Let's not miss this opportunity to get people out of those giant custodians.