Not that I know of, I only managed to get this far in my analysis. I have a protocol that might work, but theres a huge gaping hole in the protocol.
I thought about your position again, and there is a large amount of merit to creating human to human connections, which is a significant component of your push.
As long as you don't want to "scale", or are trying to build it over the net, and do it in person, it avoids the issues of proof of life.
Your solution shares its essence with a club, a WhatsApp group or interest group.
It works, but you will still be at the mercy of the large communities and economies of thought that the members are a part of.
That is the broader environment you are a part of.
Everyone from FAANG firms, governments to game companies struggle to identify real people from bots.
If your platform is global, then you have to contend with users from different legal regimes and jurisdictions.
The issue is that verification is logistically expensive, ends up infringing on rights, legally complex and on top of all that - error prone.
To top it off - If proof of life ends up gatekeeping any form of value, you will set up incentives to break verification.