I did some thinking about NEM fundraising process and imo here are the rules that presents the best spirit of the NEM fundraising:

1. Everyone could reserve 1 stake in his own account so that we have 1 account/ 1 stake rule.
2. Stakeholders could reserve  1 stake for his loved one. To do that he/ she has to create an account for that person and reserve a stake from the new account.
3. Everyone could tell their friends/ relatives to reserve a NEM stake. They could even send them the money to do so as long as these friends/ relatives are interested in crypto and NEMs.

What's against NEM's fundraising spirit is that a stakeholder tried to reserve a lot of NEM stakes for himself which imo mainly because he think NEM stake could appreciate a lot in the future. In this case, we would refund you the extra stakes. As an investor, you would be welcomed to buy as many NEM as you like when NEM officially launch but reserving more than your shares of NEM at this stage is not welcomed because: 1. the first goal of the fundraising is to spread NEM widely and equally to many people so that everyone could have an equal footing when NEM platform starts; 2. the second goal of the fundraising is to build a active community around NEM that can help to develop and promote NEM platform as well its ideas. One stakeholder reserving many NEM stakes for himself do not help much in this cause, imo.

The purpose of this public auditing is to ensure the accuracy of the stakeholder list, and to create a refunding list consisting of all confirmed sock-puppet accounts. I would define a sockpuppet account as an account made solely for the purpose of reserving a NEM stake when the account owner already owns his slot of two stakes.  This process is based on the disclaimer written in fundraising announcement that "the development team reserves the right to refund you the money if an effort to unfairly accumulate NEM stakes is discovered".

There are 2 development shares reserved for the public auditing, 1 for NXT payment auditing and 1 for BTC payment auditing. The shares could be divided to many people proportionally to their contributions  

Here are some of my proposed guidelines based on above-described principles:

1. two primary investigative tools are taint analyses and account activity analyses and they should be used together.
2. all accounts opened before the fundraiser or have more than 10 posts before today should not be considered sock-puppets.
3. all accounts with paypal payment are from individuals with real identity that I verified so they are not sock-puppets.
4. not all accounts with 1 posts are sockpuppets because they can be 1. a proxy stake bought within the rule; 2. new account but not yet active.
5. If you use taint analysis, pay attention to a group of related accounts in which many are new accounts with just 1/2 post    
6. The public auditing bounties are similar to bug-finding bounties. In the latter you try to find bug in an working program; in the former you try to find sockpuppet accounts given all the public data. You do have to make careful analyses in both.
7. Be careful when you accuse of a certain account sock-puppet. I would expect solid evidences "beyond a reasonable doubt" before I refund an account. Therefore, represent your evidences of why you think certain accounts are sockpuppets in a manner that is easy to understand to all community. Including: the sock-puppet account name, the reserving post (or profile), accounts that the sockpuppets are related.  
8. I will be updating the NEM refunding list daily to reflect the number of suspected sock-puppet accounts which will be refunded.
9. All accused sock-puppet accounts have a chance to represent themselves to repeal any accusation against them.
10. The community will make the final decision when there is an dispute regarding a sockpuppet account status.

NEM public auditing will last until next Saturday. Thanks you all for joining the effort.

Here are relevant resources:

NEM stakeholder list   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlidWok7hW0DdHVfeU1BRFVoZkJ6QTRvcjc2cTQzQ2c&usp=drive_web#gid=0
NEM stakeholder population statistics https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlidWok7hW0DdG1XYWlDemNENl9IaGR5ZHNUNTNhcmc&usp=drive_web#gid=1
Registration thread 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=422129.0
Registration thread 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=440185.0
Refunding list https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlidWok7hW0DdG5HUC1jZWp1SXJYcEVGZjRCU0FJYUE#gid=0

A note: Many NXT transaction have a spread sheet numeric formatting problem. It is known issue with Excel as well. So any bounty hunters for the NXT share should look up for the tx id in the registration threads if the tx id in the list turns out to be incorrect.
All accounts in official list are with valid tx. id and was manually checked in registration thread before, but tx. id in the stakeholder list are not guaranteed to be correct.
Hashes with Bitcoin transactions appear to be fine.