pull down to refresh
that's a withdrawal not a unilateral exit. spark's so called unilateral exit is about not needing spark involved in the exit. this is not that. this is a withdrawal that trusts spark operators to cooperate with you on the withdrawal. this withdrawal path is vulnerable to censorship and shotgun kyc.
i hope i haven't wasted your time. i know everyone is using spark now. most of us just want folks to understand that you and other people claiming "self-custody" have changed the definition dramatically to the point of making it near meaningless.
without unilateral withdrawal, spark wallet users control their funds about as well as they do when using a custodian - just with extra steps. that's okay for many people. it's just not "self-custodial."
"If the SE is unavailable or uncooperative, the user can perform a unilateral exit using the pre-signed exit transactions created during the deposit and transfer processes."
You're right that Spark isn't on-chain self-custody in the purest sense — operators co-sign exits. What we moved away from is custodial, where Club Orange (or a third party) held the keys and could freeze, seize, or lose user funds.
With Spark: user holds the seed, user can exit unilaterally to on-chain BTC, user can sweep to another Spark wallet. Operators can censor but cannot steal. That's a meaningful trust reduction vs. what we had before.