PGP signatures.

[Bill Crawford]

2008/5/28 Tim <ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au>:

> Though I seriously doubt that most of use would be using gpg in a way
> that required such a level of personal identify assurance.

While that may be true, it's not really polite to pollute the "web of
trust" with "possibly dubious" signatures (I'm not for a moment
suggesting or assuming that there's anything dubious in this case, but
the principle is important). There are people who do take these things
seriously, and we shouldn't make things more difficult for them just
because we don't agree with them. Well, not always :o)

[What do you do if you encounter a key that's signed by both someone
you trust personally, *and* someone you don't trust?]