AdamISZ responded that while it would be possible to add complexity to SNICKER by including second-stage transactions, this would likely not be implemented due to the cost implication. Additionally, he noted that the proposal aligns with CoinJoinXT and segwit ideas. The discussion also touched on the issue of watch-only wallets. AdamISZ stated that the key tweak must be secret to only the proposer and receiver but not publically derivable in any way. This makes monitoring a wallet in real-time with no privkey access incompatible with SNICKER. However, the tweak is not a money-controlling secret but rather a privacy-controlling secret, so sending along the tweak values from a hot wallet to a cold wallet could be feasible if there were enough desire for it. Overall, the discussion highlighted the potential benefits and limitations of SNICKER and the challenges related to watch-only wallets. The security of the construction for a Receiver from a Proposer was also discussed.