TL;DR --
Promoting DRK's anonymity feature as closed doors/windows/etc to keep things private still invites the falicious "you should have nothing to hide" argument.
Privacy is an inherant component of any truly fungible currency. Promote the fungibility and people will simply use it, no questions asked--and none needed!
(sorry for the long first post. I've been lurking here since page 1000 and finally just registered so I can contribute)
My Dear Bridgewater, it is a joy to have you aboard--what an excellent 1st post! While I have been touting the privacy virtues of DRK, (and in the development/charitable circles I work in this is still legit), your point is well taken. For general marketing, you are, of course, correct; privacy trumps anonymity, but fungibility beats them both in terms of marketability. After reading your post, this is obvious. I am somewhat embarrassed to say I had not noticed this before.
It is an honor to make your virtual acquaintance. I look forward to hearing more of your wisdom.
Strix
I concur Strix.
Your post Bridgewater is probably the best "1st posting" I've ever read. Like many people, I've been concerned for some time of the difficulty of explaining to average Joe why privacy in financial transactions is fundamentally important. For the bulk of us here that have been around the higher level philosophical debate on the encroachment of government and big business into our everyday lives, we're already reasonably well versed in what that's all about and why taking action to achieve financial privacy is actually taking steps towards arresting the descent into totalitarianism. But a regular citizen who's completely bought-in to the rhetoric and hyperbole that's now pumped into the masses 24x7 that they're somehow "bad" if they want to hide their financial transactions, will likely fight anything they perceive as being nefarious and with potential for criminal intent (and, of course, you no doubt will have read the many for and against arguments for a name change for Darkcoin - an aspect that's intimately linked to this same issue too).
However, if we divert the entire argument away from "everyone has a right to financial privacy" because, although perfectly true, it won't stand-up within the current fear-based mental climate, to "it's imperative for fungibility; to be able to trust units of the currency are free from suggestion of being tainted, illicit or dirty" then we've tapped in to a far more fundamental basis for establishment of a truly workable and lasting currency.
I'd be pleased to hear more of your thoughts and how this concept around fungibility (and the explanation of it) might play out.