Earlier this year, you may remember, the South Australian government tried to make it unlawful for websites like The Advertiser's AdelaideNow to publish posts about political matters during an election campaign, unless they carried the writer's real name.

The Tiser, and many of its readers, worked themselves into a fearful lather:

PUBLIC GAGGED Government censors internet — The Adelaide Advertiser, 2nd February, 2010

Read the full story as it appeared on AdelaideNow

The day that story appeared, the State Attorney-General, Michael Atkinson, backed down.

The law will be repealed he said, and meanwhile, won't be applied.

"...no one need fear now that they are being censored on the net or in blogs, whether they blog under their own name or anonymously". — AdelaideNow website, 2nd February, 2010

Read the full article published on AdelaideNow

Well, they should still be a little afraid of Mr Atkinson.

Just a week ago, AdelaideNow published this:

On 8 December 2009, a post appeared on AdelaideNow which referred to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson as a "crook". Once it was drawn to our attention, we removed it immediately. AdelaideNow accepts that such a suggestion is unfounded and unreservedly apologises to Mr Atkinson for the post. — AdelaideNow website, 22nd February, 2010

That's what we call, in the trade, a grovel. And it appeared as the result of a fierce letter from lawyers acting for the Attorney-General.

It surprised AdelaideNow, because it thought the matter had been dealt with weeks ago.

The offending post responded to this story back in early December:

Bikies gather in city to unite against anti-consorting orders — AdelaideNow website, 8th December, 2009

It did call Mr Atkinson a crook, which was certainly defamatory.

That's why it was rapidly taken down, and this appeared instead:

AdelaideNow Posted at 6.42PM... Today, a post appeared on AdelaideNow which referred to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson as a "crook"... — AdelaideNow website, 8th December, 2009

And so on - precisely the same apology as AdelaideNow posted again last week. That first grovel apparently didn't satisfy Mr Atkinson. And what hasn't been revealed before is that he didn't stop at the website.

The man who wrote the original post made the mistake of using his real name. And on Christmas Eve, Dean McQuillan too received a letter from the Attorney-General's lawyers.

His post on December the 8th, it said, was:

...highly defamatory of our client. — Letter from Norman Waterhouse Lawyers, 18th December, 2009

But Mr Atkinson was prepared to resolve his claim, the letter said, in return for...

1. $20,000 as compensation; 2. Publication of a full retraction and apology to be posted on the Adelaide Now website; — Letter from Norman Waterhouse Lawyers, 18th December, 2009

Mr McQuillan, who says he's bankrupt, sent a robust response, and has heard nothing since.

But be warned. In South Australia, at least, if you want to be rude about a minister in an internet post, safer to do it anonymously.

The state's chief law officer is prepared to threaten an ordinary citizen with ruin for posting rude remarks on the net, even when they were taken down within a couple of hours.