Point 1- I do buy into the commonalities of the IDC, although I'm not sure they are correctly/sufficiently understood. I disagree in that I DON'T think its too late for those of us who may have come up differently, without an IDC. Certainly, our experiences affect our perspectives, but no one is confused - we are an IDC and will remain so. With respect to a common culture, I think culture develops from shared experiences, beliefs, mores, etc. I think we have struggled with establishing a common IDC culture, but not because we are from different communities. Perhaps these courses will help change that. I believe full integration of all the IDC communities and missions in as many of our commands as possible (to the maximum extent practicable) will provide generate culture and define IDC (for those not in it). We are way better in this regard than we used to be (ISs at NIOC Pensacola and other places, cross detailing, etc), but I don't think we've contemplated or scratched the surface of the possible (still managing separately).
Point 2 - I don't know what I don't know (what the restraint was)- please forgive my lack of understanding. I have a hard time accepting answers which lead to reinforcing bad processes/practices when we are filled with smart, creative people. I simply don't understand why this course couldn't exist outside of NETC - bidded out through a NIOC or other command, fielded it, and taught for far less, as we do some other courses. Perhaps it is related specifically to accessions? I'll take your word for it, as I've not worked at OPNAV.
Point3 - If I remember correctly, NAVCYBER was not the TYCOM during this time. I believe FCC/C10F had the TYCOM functions from ~2012 until 01January of this year (IDFOR assumed). Doesn't seem like they were involved. Don't sweat it, though, not going to tell you off for your NAVCYBER estimation (for what it's worth, I think you are pretty accurate).