If you could then you would have but you can't because you're out of your depth. None of your examples are the result of address re-use in the CoinJoin. Unlike Wasabi's systemic & symmetric address re-use vulnerabilities which both occur in the CoinJoin transaction. 

To clarify further: in your first example above, the coordinator fee is provided during the tx0 transaction while the wallet is setting up for and prior to the CoinJoin transaction. Tx0 transactions have obvious on-chain fingerprints and I fail to see how identifying the address used by the coordinator to collect the fee has any bearing on the anonymity of the user.

In your second example, the re-used address was also re-used in a Wasabi CoinJoin tx so that doesn't help your case but more importantly, when it was re-used by Samourai, it was in the tx0 - not the CoinJoin transaction. Additionally, based on the comments in that thread, the wallet was imported to Samourai and admittedly wasn't fully synced. 

Finally in your third example and like the others, this was not a case of address re-use in the CoinJoin transaction (unlike Wasabi) but rather limited occurrences of address re-use in post-mix spending tools like Stowaway, Stonewall, & Stonewallx2. As explained in Samourai Wallet's write up of their investigation  into the reported issue: not nearly as many addresses were effected as originally claimed and for good measure Samourai Wallet introduced Strict Mode after this report to mitigate unintentional address re-use by the users when transacting with post-mix spending tools.

Despite your efforts to equate Wasabi's address re-use vulnerabilities to Samourai Wallet, you have come up short yet again.  

 What year is this? 

 Says the guy publishing podcasts about an inactive CoinJoin implementation 🙃 

 "Inactive"? Do you have a full node to verify that? My coinjoin coordinator does far more volume than Samourai's ever did: nostr:nprofile1qqsw23lc30574v5ng0mjq56kdpnkw6vhuzcdnzp6d0dqntzt8utecccpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgjwaehxw309ac82unsd3jhqct89ejhxqg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t07rmfmt 

 So since you are aware of all of Samourai's address reuse bugs, then please explain to me why anyone would want to create "toxic change" instead of becoming fully untraceable? The WabiSabi protocol solves the "peeling chain" privacy leak that is produced by the Whirlpool protocol: https://x.com/ErgoBTC/status/1181573118810361856 

 First of all, you have failed to demonstrate any Samourai Wallet "address reuse bugs" that can be equivalently compared to the systemic & symmetric address re-use vulnerabilities in Wasabi although you claimed them to be equivalent on Vlad's podcast. Second, I do not claim to be "aware of all", I have merely responded to your shitty and misleading examples.

Doxxic change in Samourai Wallet is not part of the CoinJoin tx, it comes from the setup tx (tx0) and is separated afterwards, never entering a CoinJoin round.

As for Ergo's tweet, when he says "unmixed" change, he's talking about change that comes out of a Wasabi CoinJoin tx, change that doesn't match the mixed like-amount outputs. These change outputs are far from untraceable and have been the downfall of many users. Take for example, this video where Samourai Wallet demonstrates how easy it is to unwind a Wasabi CoinJoin transaction featuring a systemic case of address re-use. Take special note of the keywords "unmixed change" in the video's caption, which sates: "The 25 BTC unmixed change went to the same address as a 0.401 BTC mixed output. User didn't do this address reuse, the client did."

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=alcLdBsoDDg 

 >First of all, you have failed to demonstrate any Samourai Wallet "address reuse bugs" that can be equivalently compared to the systemic & symmetric address re-use vulnerabilities in Wasabi although you claimed them to be equivalent on Vlad's podcast.

Why can't they be compared? I just compared them didn't I? Your comment that Whirlpool's toxic change outputs and coordinator fee outputs already have such terrible privacy that it doesn't make any difference whether or not the addresses are reused doesn't help your argument, it hurts your argument.

>As for Ergo's tweet, when he says "unmixed" change, he's talking about change that comes out of a Wasabi CoinJoin tx

Okay, and when I say "unmixed" change I'm talking about the change that comes out of a Whirlpool tx0.

Now that we are both on the same page, please explain why you wouldn't just solve the problem of unmixed change like Ergo suggested by never creating it in the first place? I even opened a Gitlab issue in Samourai's wallet for doing this: https://web.archive.org/web/20231025112756/https://code.samourai.io/wallet/samourai-wallet-android/-/issues/461 

 You could also compare apples to oranges but you would still look like a fool. 

 Let's not sidetrack the conversation with metaphors: What do you think of my Samourai Improvement Proposal? https://web.archive.org/web/20231025112756/https://code.samourai.io/wallet/samourai-wallet-android/-/issues/461 

 t-y econoalchemist