The last thing we all need

Greg, if I may be so blunt: your point may be valid but stupid. For a number of reasons. 1. Who the hell will pay for these background checks? I doubt the ITA will front the money, since this site represents more than their activities. Do we charge members to join up? Sure that will stop trolling, but mean every single member will disappear since what actor/techie has the money to pay for yet another website? 2. Inherent privacy issues. You not only have to entrust the background-checkers with private information, but ensure the site can not be hacked and the info must remain secure at all times. This therefore impacts both the site admin's job and the trust of the members. 3. Who the hell do you get to do the background checks? The cops - better things to do with their time. A private company? That would run into millions - 14k+ registered members times several days or weeks worth of tracking information down = too much money. (This is why an SSL certificate costs so much money; to get one for your website you may pay several thousand dollars for a background check) A volunteer? Even more chance that privacy will be abused. Grant, the sole admin? He has better things to do with his time. 4. Google does a background check (for Adsense) whereby they send a code to your snail mail address. Again, this costs money, and only proves that someone is at the address: anyone can use a fake address, or use a PO Box, and means very little in terms of proving who you say you are. Likewise, Paypal receives the occasional fake user, as reported by the thousands who get scammed by Chinese/whatever sellers. A Wikipedia spin off (I forget the actual name) does exactly what you suggest and only has confirmed registered users who can edit/contribute to the site; the site has not been as popular and even the founder admits inherent problems with privacy, proof of ID and security of info. 5. As repeated, even if you provide proof that you are who you say you are, it does nothing to stop people from actually trolling; it only means they first need to sign up with a real address... something they can easily do by picking a random name from the phone book, borrowing a friend's address or phone number, or whatever. This also does not mean that anyone will take libel seriously. 6. How do you feasibly do background checks on people who live overseas? There are legitimate members who join here/visit, who actually wish to be a part of this community who do not reside in Australia. Background checks in other countries presents an enormous burden both financially and legally. Likewise, as with many websites, recourse for legal action may only apply in the state/country that the website is created in (in this case, Perth, WA, Australia). There may be legal impediments to both do background checks and to enforce any legal punishment to those who reside overseas. 7. This is why most websites, except those which require payment systems (even then most payment systems work in tandem with local banks and law enforcement agencies), do not use registration that requires a background check, whatever format it is in. Facebook doesn't use it, Myspace doesn't.... why is it necessary here? (Speaking of those two websites, perhaps you should look at the suicides of kids who were harassed by members who signed up under pseudonyms, including a mother of a child who was taking revenge on behalf of her daughter. Even those with brains can abuse the system, and I doubt putting in her actual address would have stopped the harassment: case in point) 8. What do you do with members who aren't legit? Call the cops? Sue them? No... Ban them? That's what we do now, and every single day. Frankly, forcing a registration that also includes a real name/address/whatever, only means 10 times more work for the site admin; with no actual changes to the site or quality of posts. 9. If we used your suggestion, people will be able to "say what they like". How does your suggestion actually encourage quality posting and discourage libel and trolling? Basically what you're saying is that so long as I have a legitimate address, name (or known pseudonym), I can say whatever I like and take no responsibility for it... because I've registered properly and therefore can't be a troll! And nobody can complain about it cause I registered properly! May I suggest you go and research privacy, registration, etc. before making these comments? You may discover that in fact this site is already using the best mechanisms it can to provide both a worthwhile experience to the visitor and uphold the various aspects/problems that come with creating and maintaining a website. "You are correct in detailing the current four courses of action available, however may I suggest a different approach to the issue, one that I would certainly put my paw mark to. " The approach may be different, but certainly not feasible. Not unless you're willing to front the money to do these background checks in exchange for little to no reductions in trolling and/or libel. Grant on the other hand offers four reasonable, effective and feasible courses of action which are in use on millions of other sites for those same reasons. I'll also add that suing an online version of a newspaper will likely be considered differently to an online forum community by a court of law; IANAL but it's a guess. It could also be to do with the set up of the site. A newspaper will be a corporation, but an online community forum can be run by anything from a corporation to just some Joe with too much time on their hands. Likewise, terms and conditions differ from site to site and country to country. Seahorse shadow puppet for sale at Puppets in Melbourne