"it would appear there was not a clear consistent ruling in all cases. In some cases, singular and plural versions were not considered to be confusingly similar" or "It would appear that inconsistency in outcome on singular/plural cases arose because the DRSP process allowed for different expert panelists to examine individual cases although they were based on similar situations".Five years after, we are still in the "analysis mode" rather than in the "solution mode" but some possible solutions to the problem start to appear:
"This could be avoided in future by ensuring that all similar cases of plural versus singular strings were examined by the same expert panelist or by determining in advance that strings would not be delegated for singular and plurals of the same gTLD" and "The Subsequent Procedures PDP should consider adopting new policies to avoid the potential for inconsistent results in string confusion objections".A consensus?
A "success measure" appears on page 117 and says:
"...should singular and plural versions be allowed, objection panels evaluate all such cases with a consistent approach such that all single or plural disputes are resolved in the same manner".If this is no final decision to definitely kill singular VS Plural versions of a TLD, it definitely is a good start. Let's hope that such isolate problem won't take years to be solved.