new here and haven't found an answer to this conceptual question:
Crypto is said to have solved the coordination problem through rewards and punishment (honest users are rewarded; dishonest users are punished). From my understanding, this is dependent on transparency of the blockchain as it would be impossible to hold an anonymous user accountable for dishonest behavior. While dishonest use can be considered subjective, I read that BTC addresses this by allowing users to manually adjust their network to exclude dishonest nodes. To do this, one must be able to identify the "dishonest" node.
With something like Monero, I learned that the two nodes involved in a transaction are completely anonymous and that the transaction is also obscured. If this is true, then wouldn't it be impossible to identify and take action against a dishonest user? Without the ability for an individual node to subjectively discriminated between honest and dishonest nodes, wouldn't you lose all the trust in the system? How would this satisfy the coordination problem if there's no longer a means of punishment.
If that's a bit confusing I can elaborate: The Lemon vs. Peach problem often used by Monero enthusiasts describes a situation where the seller has an advantage in a transaction because they have relevant knowledge of the merchandise. If the seller continues to sell lemons, then eventually all the peaches will disappear due to buyer uncertainty within the system. It seems to me like this relates to privacy cryptos in general. If one participates in an anonymous transaction online, then the seller has the advantage. If the buyer is cheated once, then how can they be certain that they're not dealing with the same "dishonest" seller in their next transaction? We have a system of rating IRL where you can write a review for a business to let others know that they're reputable or "honest", whereas with privacy crypto you can't even recognize who you did business with.
Doesn't this pose an issue for privacy crypto in general? You're kind of entering into transactions based on blind trust with no option for recourse? Is this just the nature of privacy cryptos/privacy in general? You've effectively reduced the trust within a network to zero if members cannot actively recognize and choose who to trust.
Would it be incorrect to assume that Monero/privacy cryptos depend on IRL credibility with total node anonymity whereas Bitcoin connects the two assuming you didn't anonymously acquire BTC?
