Well we don't know the criteria NODE had used, except for this one particular post.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=590421.msg7550635#msg7550635

The problem I am sensing is that there could be false positives.  Despite Node's aggressive anti-sock detection they only rooted out individuals with between 2 to 6 stakes.  The biggest one I can immediately see has 6 stakes in NODE while most have less than that.  And that probably includes a few false positives.

Even with that aggressive sock hunting (even more aggressive than NEM due to witchhunting methods like "intuition" and other stuff), they didn't undercover any huge sock masters.  Like it's mainly guys with 2-3 stakes (with the odd person with 4 to 6), nothing which ruins NODE's distribution.

Does that mean NODE is worthless?  No.. it means, with the exception of 20 people who took 2 to 5 times more share, it was well distribution to over a thousand people.

NEM is the sameway I think.  Maybe if we used NODE's aggressive stance / witchhunt we could uncover maybe 30 to 40 sock masters (including false positives) but those sockmasters probably only have 3 to 4 stakes (the odd person with 5 to 7).


 NEM is still going to have that good distribution of maybe 2700+ unique persons (after the auction).

The reality is this: NEM was a fork back in January and there wasn't the incentive to create a billion socks to game what was then a fork, the samething was true for NODE.  All the time it takes to bypass taint analysis and other detection methods, never mind the anti-spam thing on Bitcointalk, the hysteria about huge sock masters just doesn't have any basis in reality.