Here are two options for displaying if other temporary accounts are active on the same IP or IPv6 /64 range:

A: Uses the 'message notice' component, which makes the information prominent.
B: Includes a count to indicate how many temp users are from this IP. Adds the information to the list on the card so it's less prominent.

I don’t think it needs to be that prominent. The actual number might be of value in order to decide whether it’s worth the time/effort to look at other temp accounts. That’s why I prefer option B.

@Johannnes89 - thanks for the feedback! Would bucketed numbers that protect privacy (e.g. 5-10) be useful? There are privacy concerns with using exact counts.

The latest iterations display a bucketed count in order to protect user privacy:

I think it's good for the information to be easily visible, but considering just how common it is for multiple people to be assigned the same IP(v4) address (either in short order or simultaneously), I would caution against any UI design choices that may suggest to people that the presence of multiple TAs is inherently a reason for concern, so I'd definitely prefer B or C. Including counts seems like it may be useful, including in buckets if need be.

As an afterthought: I dont think the lowermost bucket should include 0, because that would essentially make the information pretty much useless in many cases.

In T389448#10805257, @Blablubbs wrote:

As an afterthought: I dont think the lowermost bucket should include 0, because that would essentially make the information pretty much useless in many cases.

Thank you, that's a good point. We could use the buckets 1-5, 5-10, 10-20 etc? Or would larger ranges be useful?

In T389448#10805293, @KColeman-WMF wrote:

In T389448#10805257, @Blablubbs wrote:

As an afterthought: I dont think the lowermost bucket should include 0, because that would essentially make the information pretty much useless in many cases.

Thank you, that's a good point. We could use the buckets 1-5, 5-10, 10-20 etc? Or would larger ranges be useful?

Given that a single user can accidentally create 6 accounts per day by blocking all cookies I could imagine cases where larger ranges might be useful. But usually something like 1-5, 5-10, 10-20, 20-50, 51+ should be fine. I prefer option C from your latest iterations by the way.

Feedback on buckets from Discord channel:

IMO: 0, 1-2, 3-5, 6-10, 11+ If you want bigger buckets, then: 0, 1-5, 6-10, 11+
Smaller buckets are useful to indicate scale of possible abuse.

We have made a decision to go with smaller ranges for initial rollout of the User Info Card: 0, 1-2, 3-5, 6-10, 11+. This will give an indication of the possible scale of abuse. If larger buckets are preferred than we can revisit this again.