# Gavin Andresen
# 2010-12-23 13:52:10
# https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2404.msg32713#msg32713

@s{quotedtext}
@s{quotedtext}
 @p{brk}
If you expect a one-to-one relationship between transactions and bitcoin addresses, then yes, a multisend will be a problem for you. @p{par}

If I were implementing the anonymous fund-with-a-bitcoin-address system, I would do something like: @p{par}

Customer "Ed" gives a "send winnings to address"@p{--} lets say it just happens to be   1Ed.... @p{brk}
Casino gives a funding address @p{--} lets call that address   1fundEd... @p{par}

Casino creates an account named "1Ed..." and associates it with address 1fundEd. @p{brk}
So any coins Ed sends to 1fundEd....  go into the 1Ed... account. @p{par}

When Ed wants to place a bet, casino checks to see if he has money:   getbalance 1Ed.... @p{brk}
If he does, he can place a bet. @p{brk}
If he wins, casino sends money: @p{brk}
  move BANK 1Ed...  @p{lt}amount Ed won above his bet@s{gt} @p{brk}
  sendfrom 1Ed... 1Ed.... @p{lt}amount Ed won@s{gt}   # Account name and cash-out address are the same. @p{brk}
If he loses: @p{brk}
  move 1Ed... BANK @p{lt}amount Ed lost@s{gt} @p{par}

listtransactions is for showing Ed a detailed list of what happened to his account. @p{brk}