Dear DZack23,
As we cleared out in the first part (Challenging Periods Reimagined: Road to dynamic challenging periods - #20 by daniFi), our sequencer assumes both the sequencing and the posting.
For the point of view of the analysis and modelling, there is no problem, as we can transpose the analysis for Arbitrum’s validators. The challenging period is modeled based on the batch value and on the validator’s (we called it sequencer, because of the double role) reputation.
Everything is still valid, the difference is nomenclature.