" 

 == Checkuser evidence == 

 It is difficult to discuss the specifics of the evidence while at the same time respecting the privacy policy and not disclosing IP or ISP information.  (Kloksmann could waive this if he wanted to.)  In general, all the accounts listed at  Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Klaksonn share two ISPs, which I will designated Alpha and Beta. 
 *Kloksmann's edits of 12 May are on Alpha, and are mingled with edits from the same day by , ,  and  and are technically indistinguishable. 
 *Five Rupees and Nasrulana edited from this particular IP address on and off over a span of 14 hours (with Kloksmann's edits in the middle of that span), an unusual time span for an internet cafe. 
 *Kloksmann's edit of 7 June came from ISP Beta.  He only made one logged-in edit but that IP has about 10 anonymous edits at the same general time, including some to articles that Nasrulana and Five Rupees have edited. 
 *Nasrulana, Five Rupees and the other accounts listed use many IP addresses from ISPs Alpha and Beta, never keeping a single IP address for more than 24 hours.  This is consistent with dynamic IP addressing.  I have seen this frequently with residential addresses, but never before with legitimate businesses like internet cafes.  That's not to say it's impossible that an internet cafe would have a dynamic address, but it is something I have not encountered before. 
 *It is possible that at least one of the ISPs (Alpha) is in fact using dynamic addressing.  Their press releases seem to indicate that they resell internet access to other in-country ISPs so that local ISPs don;t have to invest in their own infrastructure.   So I can not rule out that at least Alpha may not only be dynamic but also shared.  Even so, the occurrence of Nasrulana, Five Rupees and others on the same IPs at the same times over and over is strong evidence that they are the same.  I suppose it is possible that Kloksmann's two edits on 12 May being on the same IP was a coincidence.   
 *Ultimately checkuser is just a tool, and one can always make claims about shared access and so forth. 
 *I think the evidence is pretty clear, but you can squeeze some reasonable doubt out of the situation simply because this is (to me) a foreign country and a foreign ISP and I know less about its internal workings than I would (for example) Comcast in the US, and I suppose its better to leave a sockpuppet account unblocked than to block a good user.    

 :Do you mean leave a sockpuppet account blocked?    
 ::I'm going to decline the unblock.  He's edited from BOTH Alpha and Beta, which are shared by a known sock family.  This account edited at the same time as a number of anonymous edits to articles frequented by the same sock family. This one doesn't pass the duck test, once Thatcher explained his evidence.  Feel free to disagree, but I'm going to decline the unblock.  -  "