Maybe I'm not understanding you.
Just to clarify: I'm suggesting that a known party, like a neighborhood watch group, offer rewards for tips leading to an arrest. The person providing information is anonymous. The person giving the reward is not. So payer is known and the receiver is anonymous.
In this scenario,
the neighborhood watch group verifies the information before sending the reward to the bitcoin address of the person providing the information.
Paysafe cards can be anonymous too , but only for the user. The receiver or the merchant it's not.
So they wouldn't work for what I'm suggesting, which is that the receiver, who provided the information, is anonymous, and the payer is known.
you example
bitcoin reward (anonymous) > central authority > bitcoin reward (anonymous)
paysafe coupon (anonymous) > neighbourhood watch (not anonymous) > paysafe coupon (anonymous)
it's not a A > B , its A > C >B
this was for your first post now you come back with:
"So they wouldn't work for what I'm suggesting, which is that the receiver, who provided the information, is anonymous, and the payer is known."
we'll , whats different than send me a paysafecard or coupon ?
this is the way cryptovirus worked before bitcoin
the person giving the reward was not , the guys receiving the payment , well they still are.
Maybe my paysafe example was bad , but what about green moneypak the guys with the virus are using.?
