You could rely on the reputation of the reviewers, while concealing the identity of the authors from everyone. That may be what Invictus0 was suggesting, and i

You could rely on the reputation of the reviewers, while concealing the identity of the authors from everyone. That may be what Invictus0 was suggesting, and it does sound workable. It raises one question—"How do we get the first reputable scientist to bother reviewing Mr. Anon's paper?" But as long as there wasn't a huge problem of outright spam, or of crackpot submissions that eat up too much time... or if serious submitters had to offer a monetary bounty (on the order of $100-$500) for the first or the first few reviewers, or if the bounty was more like a "security deposit" which would be given back if the paper was confirmed to be neither spam nor crackpot... There seem to be multiple plausible options.