How much proof is enough??
I'm making edits on a piece about red and green flags in witchcraft products/services for ADversaries and I'm curious to know if I'm just a hardass about proof of spellcasting or not. Assume for the sake of the poll that:
You would, indeed, pay for a spell of your choice (even if you wouldn't in reality; play with me in this hypothetical space!)
You do not know the witch casting the spell personally, and you have not bought a service from them in the past
You will pay what you would consider a fair sum for the spell
This is the proof the caster says they will provide to you
It should enough for you to believe that the spell has been done at all, has been done with care and quality, and was worth the money you paid for it
If you were to pay for a spell service, what would be acceptable to you as promised proof of a spell actually being cast on your behalf?
The seller's word alone (a notification of completion and nothing more)
A photo of the spell (before, during, or after casting)
A basic written summary of the spell as completed
A detailed written report of the spell as completed
A video of the spell being performed
Casting the spell live, on camera
Casting the spell live, via text/DMs
A combination of these things (specify in replies/reblogs)
None of these would be enough, even in combination
Something else entirely (specify in replies/reblogs)
Additional thoughts welcome, also.
