From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 20:28:32 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: for-pay remailers and FV
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9501061816.A25172-0100000@netcom10>
Message-ID: <199501070428.UAA21189@largo.remailer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@netcom.com>

   On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, Eric Hughes wrote:
   > This whole fracas between blind-sig money and FV money is a symptom of
   > the confusion between clearing and settlement.

   It is nothing to do with that confusion.

Keep your day job.

   > To wit, a remailer consortium would do best to issue a local banknote
   > usable only by themselves and have customers settle with the
   > consortium issuer, rather than any member of the consortium itself.
   > If the consortium issuer were to use blind sigs, the consortium
   > members wouldn't be able to ascertain who paid.

Get it?  The first sentence refers to a "local banknote".  The second
sentence refers to a particular way of issuing that banknote.  Passage
from the general to the specific.

   The problem that we are discussing is how to solve them 
   without using Chaumian money.

Think about how a local clearing organization allows this.

Eric