I believe that to have a successful ICO, it’s important to follow the models that are out there. The best ones IMO all have a strong group of advisors … and while in most cases the team/founders came first and then selected advisors, I don’t see a problem with that happening the other way around.
I agree that advisors should be allowed to vote/rank projects … but in a way we already have a nice list of projects that are ranked, so a great starting point I think. Advisors could also select a board from their ranks - people who have more time to devote to the foundation - I may be repeating myself here from the O.P. …
As to how and where a foundation is created e.g. DAO and/or legal foundation organized in country xyz … for the time being I don’t think we need to decide that … I think that should be decided by the board of directors as chosen by the group of advisors - that way, it will have the advisors and most of the community behind the decision by default.
So, while I am still open to hearing criticisms of the foundation idea in general, allow me to propose that anyone who is interested in being an advisor to the foundation, please raise your hand now in this thread by saying so.
I, for one, would like to be an advisor.
I will compile a list of those interested. If we get a good group of people - particularly well respected (long time) forum members to sign up to this, then we can go from there, else I will message some of them directly and see if I can get them on board.
Basically though, I don’t want to front-run any decisions on what this foundation may be without the consent of such a group.
… so join up now!