I wasn't trying to prove anything. In fact, I like what friedcat has to say about trustworthiness, in the first question found in this post:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1088045
"...trustworthiness can only be disproved."
There is nothing anyone can do to prove they are trustworthy. Someone can only be proven to be untrustworthy, and that's only after they've scammed someone, not before.
What is it about dooglus that causes this concern? I understand there are others in this forum that have scammed in the past, but what does this have to do with him? Was he even associated with any of them?
Another possibility: What if dooglus accidentally lights every copy of his offline wallet on fire simultaneously? Are investors protected?
It also completely dodges the intent of the analogy, destroying any hopes I had for a reasonable conversation.
"I'm worried about alien abduction"
"What happens if our log cabin spontaneously combusts while the whole town is inside, will we be ok?"
"Fire extinguishers exist in some countries."
I'm not qualified to answer these questions, because I don't know all of the specific security measures he has in place. I'm less concerned about the integrity of dooglus than I am about the malicious intent of a thief or a government bureacrat. These questions aren't related to that.
No. I am an investor though. Every bitcoin investment requires an element of trust. I invest in individuals that I consider to be competent and trustworthy and spread the risk accordingly. If I was worried about everyone being a scammer, I'd just put my BTC in a paper wallet and let them sit.
I believe having a diversified portfolio is the best way for me to "hedge" my investments and protects me from having something go horribly wrong with one of them.