As a prospective gTLD applicant, who's gone through 3yrs of funding rounds.. and been through the entire application process requirements without submitting the final application.

All I can say is this glitch could have as a brief summary:

1. Compromised stages of funding for 3 yrs.  <£5m
2. Put my head on the line
3. If any IP on policy, even documents that had been withdrawn was disclosed including any user information. This could have compromised:
a. Our entire business model
b. Partnership association
c. Trust in the ICANN process to ensure confidentiality and meet their commitments as stated in the guidebook

So it is with interest to see how well they manage this and the consequential reaction.
 

Kristina Macaulay
Managing Director
0044 (0)7969991505

Global Identity Ltd.
www.globalidentity.eu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xmz94mBDf0

Global Identity Ltd. Is a company registered in Scotland no. 407802
Registered office: 1/1 30 Edgemont Street - Glasgow - G41 3EL
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses. Please note that this e-mail has been created in the knowledge that the Internet e-mail is not a secure communications medium. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of security when e-mailing us.
The Service Provider retains the right to use IP content for marketing use. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, all intellectual property rights arising out of this email shall vest in the Service Provider: Global Identity Ltd (GIL). The intellectual property is owned by Kristina Macaulay and the content of the email is also owned by Kristina Macaulay. Emails are typed using Dragon Dictate.


On Apr 21, 2012, at 01:25 PM, "Carlos A. Afonso" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Wow, Milton, this is really amazing. This is not a simple
> "implementation mistake". This involved serious breach of privacy of
> expensive applications which are part of investment strategies by
> business organizations in most cases. There is an obvious liability
> issue here involved. It cannot be dismissed as just "a computer form
> that did not work as expected", and cannot be left in the hands of the
> same staff which caused the problem. And you are not a computer
> scientist, you are a political scientist as far as I recall, which
> surprises me even more.
>
> And Bill Drake merrily embarks on the dismissing argument, what is going
> on with you people? :(
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 04/21/2012 03:54 AM, William Drake wrote:
> > I agree. The governance model has issues, but this is a separate
> > matter. We've just gone through the whole GNSO restructuring,
> > ramping up the AoC process, etc. ICANN doesn't need and probably
> > couldn't handle another extended bout of navel-gazing debate about
> > reinvention right now. It needs to let the dust settle for awhile,
> > get new leadership in place, get new gTLDs up and running, sort out
> > IANA, advance the "internationalization" and outreach efforts, etc.
> > Plenty on the plate already.
> >
> > I can't imagine that the business folks that are laying out big cash
> > and maneuvering around new names aren't already screaming about the
> > screw up, or that the management won't be compelled to explain what
> > happened and assure everyone it hasn't skewed the application process
> > for/against anyone. If there's going to a joint request for info
> > from SO/AC chairs or whatever, fine, but it's not obvious to me NCSG
> > needs to spend a bunch of cycles on this unless folks are looking for
> > something to do.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > On Apr 19, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> >
> >> I am not sure I agree with the premise that an implementation
> >> mistake by the staff constitutes grounds for completely reinventing
> >> and rethinking ICANN. Can someone explain the logic of that to me?
> >> For example, if the Capitol building of one of the world's first
> >> democracies, e.g., the USA, had collapsed due to incompetent
> >> construction, would it mean that we should re-think the nature of
> >> democracy?
> >>
> >> I think they need to fix the mistake, fire those responsible, and
> >> move on.
> >>
> >> The root of the problem, to my mind, is not the governance model
> >> but, in this order: a) management problems; b) the rube
> >> Goldberg-like complexity of the new TLD program, and c) the more
> >> than a decade-long delay in accepting a policy, which means that we
> >> are dealing with a sudden flood of 1000+ applications rather than a
> >> steady trickle of 10 or so a year, and which, like b), is a product
> >> of the intense politics swirling around the program.
> >>
> >> Remember that this has never been done before.
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ICANN needs to rethink and reorganize itself!
> >>>
> >