Re: I want to sign but...
There might be an issue with the idea of a regulator. The regulator by definition has to be a censor, any other role would render them irrelevant. Since the censor has to stay in a job they're likely to approve only harmless material -- press releases, for the most part -- which would cause a lot of the interesting material to disappear. The costs trick is a neat way of forcing a publisher's hand, typical of the modern way to do an end run around peoples' rights -- sure, you have your rights, it will just bankrupt you to exercise them.
(I've also got a bit of an issue with anyone called "Mosley". Mr. Max is the youngest son of the late Oswald who was a well known Fascist. Although Max can't be held accountable for his father's sins his biography suggests that the apple doesn't fall that far from the tree.....you'd be getting at best an ultra-conservative running the press censorship organization.)
Maybe the answer is to move publishing (nominally) to the US. Here, at least for the time being, we have a long standing tradition of press freedom bolstered by a well understood 'public interest' defense against libel actions. While it does mean that we have to put up with all sorts of crap -- fake news isn't a new phenomenon -- we realize that ion of the cornerstones of democracy is the ability to publish news and opinion.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
