The reality is that Afilias did a pretty good job of hacking themselves as stated in theregister.co.uk interview with Roland La Plante, chief marketing officer of Afilias.
"If we did it again, before we went live we would test it under a more significant load. We would also have taken steps to make it more difficult to put the wrong information into the [domain registration] form. For example, we didn't specify how to put dates in, we just had a date field. This has made it harder to do an effective search."
Full article here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/22151.html
I don't remember what level 101 course these issues were covered in but .....
It's unfortunate that their funding pulled out and Iím sure it didnít help the situation any, but statements such as the previous one leave me wondering if the problems were more and issue of inexperience, stretching the truth regarding their abilities in their application and making promises that they could not possibly deliver on.
After all, Afilias was nothing more than a board of directors and a legal department when they submitted their application. Itís still beyond me how ICANN can find an application based on promises to be more valid than one based on actual experience operating an established, working and stable registry.
The whole bug plagued .info rollout fiasco leaves me with two questions:
- Did ICANN REALLY think that Afilias had the technically superior plan?
- Is it obvious only to me or others as well, that ICANN ignored important issues such as technical ability, stability and validity of the promises made in the application in lieu of picking their FRIENDS.