leveling a criticism that it does not solve the whole problem at once is not very productive.

I'm not trying to be negative for the sake of being negative, or even for the sake of criticizing your proposal--I was disagreeing with your prediction that CFAR will have an easier time of meeting GiveWell's requirements.

(I actually like your proposal quite a bit, and I think it's an avenue that CFAR should investigate. But I still think that the verification problem is hard, and hence I predict that CFAR will not be very good at providing GiveWell with a workable rationality metric.)