I do not like the notion that is being advocated here, which is that the internet is a land in which guilt is presumed and that innocence must be proved. I rather take a different tack - I presume that people and organizations are innocent. This is not a new or unique point of view. If one wants to penetrate privacy that person ought to be required: - To make a clear accusation stating: - The identity of the accuser - The nature and extent of the unlawful behaviour - Evidence that the accused is engaging in that behaviour. - Proof that the accuser has the right for relief. - All of this should be delivered (if possible) the accused. Then the accused should have an opportunity to rebut. And all of this should be, at the option of the accused, included in a public ledger so that we can see who are abusive accusers. --karl--