Policy-Discussion

[Peter Williams <home_pw AT msn.com>]

None of these issues are novel.

If an assurer is a notary public, s/he will already know how to deal  
with these issues effectively (and in a manner that satisfies the  
public trust).

If an assurer has heartburn, perhaps invite the person to first become  
a notary public.

In countries without paralegal traditions to the us notary or post  
master general standards (which are not particularly rigorous methods,  
but do non the less meet the public trust test), one needs to find an  
equivalent social role. In some countries, it's a (desk) policeman, or  
a schoolmaster turned justice of the peace for juveniles etc.

What you don't do is make up adhoc corporate style rules. Employer/ 
employee dynamics are rarely fair (to the employee). Seller/buyer  
rules dont tend to work well either, unless the seller is a regulated  
utility with standards set and evaluated by third parties.

On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:02 PM, Daniel Black 
<daniel AT cacert.org>
 wrote:

> Gathering more evidence would be useful.
>
> Tearing up identity documents, usually government property in personal
> possession(?), is probably illegal (or at least dangerous for the  
> assurer).
>
> In a case of mistrust I think compelling or encouraging to continue  
> beyond a
> person's comfort is the wrong thing.
>
> I'd rather get an Assurance Policy that shows how to do assurances  
> properly
> and is as short as possible. This would leave the edge cases to  
> personal
> judgement so forcing them down a line doesn't risk the WoT integrity.
>
> --
> Daniel Black
> CAcert