As Ted highlighted, John has thrown up a straw man that nobody would
ever reasonably propose (the IESG being consulted on every name), where
that has nothing to do with 6761 or any other existing or contemplated
process.
Can we please at least stay within the realm of reality?
Well, OK. If the plan isn't that we get to look at every name in the
next round, what names do we get to look at?
It doesn't seem likely that we can prepare a complete set of names
with substantial informal use or other technical problems. Some of
the problems depend on context. For example, there is a lot of old
CPE that leaks queries for .BELKIN. But maybe if a TLD application
were from the same company that made the leaky devices, that would be
OK.
R's,
John