Policy-Discussion

[Ian Grigg <iang AT systemics.com>]

On Saturday 23 July 2005 13:57, Russell Smith wrote:
> Should we also move to make sure that the person being assured checks the 
> identity of the assurer, as to give both the assured and assuser the same 
> information about each other?
> This would also help to reduce assurers who have incorrect details, as 
> those who are assured will have a few questions about why details are wrong.

This is a good idea.  If the assurer gets a couple of points for
every assurance, perhaps those points can be allocated for
the reverse-assurance provided by the new subscriber?

Fresh eyes bring in fresh checks.

It should be optional though.  Some assurers won't want to
be linked to other people, but are happy to serve the common
cause by bringing in new subscribers.  Hence the points.

iang
-- 
Advances in Financial Cryptography, Issue 2:
   https://www.financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/000498.html
Mark Stiegler, An Introduction to Petname Systems
Nick Szabo, Scarce Objects
Ian Grigg, Triple Entry Accounting