The post you are reporting:
Pseudonyms are a double edged sword. Real names may force a degree of honesty, i.e. 'nothing to hide', they can also work against the truth being spilt, it is quite obvious that having accountability enforced can stifle debate. Certain facts and scandal are more likely to emerge in the public domain if posters feel that they will have no come back via their true identity. It works both ways.
Certain topics can get run into the ground and crop up again and again ad nauseam, but I'm not going to name them for fear of offending the posters. I think also it is true that some of us now know each other so well online and in person that we can predict the type of responses - sometimes it has put me off as I've thought 'I just can't be bothered to argue with so and so' who will reply with 'such and such'.
Despite claims of there are not being too much politics, and maybe there is some validity in the argument, in my experience that's not the generally accepted view. I know people who have looked in and stated they wouldn't bother again as it is always political. Politics, especially national politics, is a massive turn off for many. Andy is absolutely spot on as usual in this regard.
As has been pointed out to keep the forum fresh new blood is needed, this is clear. Maybe Paul needs to go back and reassess the forum. Why not open it to the public again? I am certain it will be very popular. I know this has been brought up many times before before and Paul understandably does not wish to become entangled in legal turmoil, but that was a couple of years ago, and a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. Why not try it again and see where it goes? To put it simply a restricted membership will simply run out of topics, and new debate.
This is absolutely not a criticism Paul, and please don't take it as such, but maybe a problem is the name here. It's not really a Forum for Dover, more of a debating club for a limited group of locals, and I think the perceived exclusivity may deter applications to join. If you are really worried about accountability should you open it up again, why not have a legal contract towards injudicious comments clearly ticked and signed for before a member posts? Most forums operate this way.
Please take the above a positive suggestion, not a criticism. There is some great stuff on here whch is why I'm always looking in every day even if not posting very much.