Hiya,
Harsh asked me to review a bunch of text in the next day
or so, and I'll do that.
My first, and very strong, reaction was to the proposed
project name: "EURO-CyberPERFECTiON" is just awful. It's
maybe 15 years since I evaluated EU proposals but if I
saw that title, my immediate reaction would be that there's
bullshit afoot. Sorry to be so blunt, but I worry that
all your significant effort could be damaged by that. I'd
also worry that any good project results would be tainted by
such a name.
Reasons:
1) "EURO-*" isn't right: I don't believe the goal is at
all to develop some solely-European technology. nor would
such make sense. (It might for legal matters, but not for
tech.) It's also redundant as the EU are the funders and
they know where they're based already;-)
2) cyber - despite the EU using the term in the call, use
of that term IMO exposes the user to a valid charge of
using a well-known-to-be-terribly badly defined term.
3) perfection - what? really? that's just setting the
project up for a pile of prat-falls.
All in all that's the worst proposal for a project name
I've encountered and I've been doing EU-funded stuff since
ESPRIT back in the late 1980's. (Again, sorry to be blunt.)
I don't really mind what the project might be called but
frankly I'd be embarrassed to be associated with something
with that title.
My suggestion is that two or three of the most involved
people change that to something deliberately bland but
without calling for an all-in discussion which'd waste
time. (I'm happy to be involved in that discussion since
I'm bringing this up late, but I'm also fine if it just
happens with no further input from me.)
Cheers, and apologies a 3rd time for bluntness,
S.