Hm... isn't it possible, by taking a look at the IP, to make out wether someone has multiple accounts? That would be [i:87b92d72f7]one [/i:87b92d72f7] possible case of identity fraud.
That might be worth a try in such cases. Then it should be made public, and adressed, as has been in the past in those cases where it was discovered (f.e. Fatman, or one other poster I seem to remember who incidentally answered a post directed to his one identity while he was still logged in as the other. I may be suffering from false memory syndrome here...)

I suppose, even if I, when being suspicious, would prefer to talk about it openly, I'd made it depend on the wieght of evidence. If I have a vague, vague suspicion because a person has a writing style very similar to that of an old problem poster, I might keep it to myself and see if, maybe, that person either delivers more evidence or if I learn more about her/him and am finally, confronted with pics of her/his kids, dogs and friends, plus a copy of her/his ID card, convinced the person is genuine.

If more evidence is delivered, I might talk to a few people to see wether they can follow my train of thought.... I'm not saying it [i:87b92d72f7]should [/i:87b92d72f7]be done like that, but it would be my natural reaction. And I imagine most people would do that, no matter what the Guidelines say. I think, though, we should agree on discussing it publicly once the process got that far, or it will only result in a lot of talk behind people's back, and mutual damage. I still think the vaguest of suspicions should be kept private, because even if a person can easily prove he/she is genuine, most people wouldn't want to have to.

I'm against discussing it behind the scene only when the whole thing got to the point were discussions have to be made, in any case.

"Hoher Sinn liegt oft im kindischen Spiel." (Friedrich Schiller)