> you mean an on-chain multisig? I'm not against that exactly, but it's getting further away from Cashu
Funds stay inside an on-chain N-of-N multisig pool and you get instant, Lightning-like balance updates among participants with a final on-chain exit. No single custodian; disputes resolve via multi-party mechanisms. This preserves Bitcoin-native security but requires sophisticated exit, dispute, and privacy design.
> I feel like the general idea of Cashu is to trust the mint for "settlement", instead of using the blockchain, partly because it's much faster than the chain.
in my limited understanding, adopting a Cashu mint-based settlement layer the off-chain settlement is accelerated by trusted mint attestations, but at the cost of introducing trust in the mint and potential liquidity constraints. In a Cashu-like arrangement, per-user liquidity is bound by the mint’s token liquidity and the ability to redeem; Lightning liquidity becomes a practical constraint because token minting/redemption must be backed by lightning liquidity so someone has to open the channels on chain anyhow. This can cap the effective throughput and affect routing of payments within the pool.
