I've been giving some thought to how peer moderation can be implemented beyond a simple Reddit-style downvote system. I don't think that's really suitable here since this site's primary limitation is a lack of moderators and "downvotes" would just put a band-aid on the problem. The core issue is that most of the problems come from new members, especially those who joined in bad faith. As such, here are some suggestions for improving the quality of the content on SDF.
All recent members (say, those who registered in the past 12 months) and new registrants be put on a 6 month probationary period where they are permitted to make only a few posts in a 24 hour period (2-3 should be sufficient). The content of these posts would be automatically hidden, sort of like how the ignore function works. The hiding would be removed either by several more senior members upvoting the content or moderator intervention. If sustained engagement with the new user's posts is sufficiently positive, the probation could be waived.
The point of this system is to make trolling prohibitively expensive. Unfortunately, new accounts are being approved very quickly - I say "unfortunately" because there simply aren't enough moderators to handle this. As the ratio of users to moderators goes up, quality goes down. I've repeatedly reported trolling and nothing gets done about it simply because mods don't have enough time and there aren't enough of them. To wit:
Retracted, needs revision.
www.sinodefenceforum.com
Even if the problematic users get banned, it's a trivial exercise for them to spin up new accounts. Restricting new accounts increases the time investment one would need to troll from minutes to set up a burner to months.