A while ago, I had a good friend who couldn't find a job, so I helped him get a referral, thinking that friends should help each other in tough times. Later, I heard through others that he was saying I had let him down.
When I heard about this, I felt truly heartbroken—here I was, trying to help him, and it turned out to be my fault.
This incident made me think clearly about one question: what was my role when I referred him for the job, what did I promise, and where are my boundaries of responsibility?
The EthSign mechanism for @SignOfficial addresses the problem of ambiguous responsibilities for referees. If I had recorded the referral on-chain through EthSign—my role would have been just to connect him without being responsible for his job performance.
Both parties would confirm and sign that boundary on-chain, and anyone could check it. If he went around saying I let him down, the on-chain record would directly clarify where my responsibility ended.
Moreover, the attestation from Sign Protocol turns verbal referral relationships into on-chain records with defined boundaries. When disputes arise, it’s not about who can shout louder; it’s about what is documented on-chain.
Referrers and guarantors are two completely different things, and clearly defining that boundary on-chain makes it impossible to be misrepresented.
Of course, friends referring each other for jobs today may not think to sign an on-chain agreement; changing habits takes time, and this is an inference, not a reality.
But this need is very real—there are not just me and others who have been bitten back by those we helped.