the Lies of Cypherpunks

["L. Detweiler" <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu>]

Could an eminent psychopunk explain to the several dozen sane people
left on the list:

Suppose that a real person signed someone else's imaginary identity for
a key in a key server, or for their own. Can someone explain to me why
this is not dishonest?

I guess the argument will be, the signor is only guaranteeing that some
key is associated with some email address. But that seems to me to
abuse the whole idea of trust in people. Has anyone asked PRZ what he
thinks of the practice of real people signing imaginary identities? or
key servers corrupted with phantom identities?