By the way, I think it would make sense for there to be a requirement that a node provider list all their aliases and companies somewhere that is verifiable. While there may be no rules (and probably shouldn’t be) against using multiple aliases and business names, it shouldn’t be a challenge to know who is linked to who when checking it against the rules that limit how many nodes a node provider is allowed to operate. I think it makes sense that a node provider would want to create a new business entity in each location and I don’t really see an issue with having multiple forum or other social aliases. Hence, the rules should be tolerant of these scenarios.
They have nothing to gain by doing this either. Registering as a node provider does not entitle you to remuneration. If they are banned as a node provider, then they will be left with a specialized asset that they cannot easily sell for it’s depreciated value.
There is an excess of nodes. The NNS does not take a hit if a large number of nodes and node providers are removed. Currently there are at least 77 node chits that could rightfully be allocated that are not being paid remuneration, but the NNS is not suffering in any way.