Can you see that we are just as concerned about the mod-troll and fairness issue as you seem to be about what you are concerned about? The former goes to site reputation and moderation; the latter goes to site security. We have the solution for the former, which solution can be implemented as suggested; while the latter is up to the site managers per se....but no amount of victimizing members will solve THAT problem, since if the site is so vulnerable that a schoolchild can mess with it, then pissing people off can only keep increasing the potential for someone hacking us. Net net: the potential for hacking is always there, even from someone unconnected with the site; so adding pissed-off people to the list of potential hackers is not a rational policy, is it? And anyway, I have it from a couple of mates of mine in the industry that it's not unheard of that hacking has been made easier by 'insider' complicity by someone 'trusted' by the site/owner. So if we are to be properly 'paranoid', it may be prudent to review who has/had insider access to sensitive information/tools which may be betrayed by pissed off insiders to malignant groups of hackers? Not accusing, just one of the many considerations needed to be faced whenever site security is being discussed/assessed. Good luck!