A Cashu mint has no ability to recognize or rug any particular individual claimant, which is typically implied when someone says “fully custodial”
It’s all trade-offs, I just take umbrage with “fully” when in fact there is important nuance here
In this case your nuance = pedantry. You have no custody over the funds that hold the value. That does not negate the use cases of Cashu, but it's important for users to understand as many think it is a way of using Bitcoin self-custodially.
It is a method of custody solution that mitigates many of the problems of “fully custodial” solutions, including greater privacy, censorship resistance, reduced individual ruggability, bearer instrument qualities
That’s a pretty massive asterisk which applies to your “fully custodial” claim
