"Warning - while you were reading 193 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post."
LOL
For the record, I LOVE that the Foundation exists now. I think this is a huge positive step for Bitcoin. Few negatives, plenty of positives. I also understand the concern many people feel - we should always be diligent and skeptical of anyone trying to be "the face" of Bitcoin. But in this case specifically, and to the extent this Foundation can act in certain manners for certain goals, I think it's a very legitimate development and I'll be joining as a paying member here soon.
LOL
For the record, I LOVE that the Foundation exists now. I think this is a huge positive step for Bitcoin. Few negatives, plenty of positives. I also understand the concern many people feel - we should always be diligent and skeptical of anyone trying to be "the face" of Bitcoin. But in this case specifically, and to the extent this Foundation can act in certain manners for certain goals, I think it's a very legitimate development and I'll be joining as a paying member here soon.
I must wonder if you'd be saying the same if Charlie wasn't a board member. Not that I think you're trying to be manipulative, it's just hard to believe you are looking at this objectively and aren't highly biased.
Please, don't be absurd.
If Charlie was doing something I disagreed with, he would know, and I'd have no problem discussing it on the forum. It happens that Charlie and I tend to agree on almost everything, especially after some discussion... though he's still slightly too statist for my taste, though this is changing fairly quickly, because Charlie is a smart guy 
I've long been in favor of a more formal, more structured Foundation type organization to foster Bitcoin growth. I worry that people do not understand the difference between voluntary, market-based order and coercive order. They think the Foundation is the latter, when it's not.
A decentralized system can (and indeed, ought to) have certain "nodes" of organization and structure. It is the same dynamic which occurs with the bitcoin exchanges. The system is decentralized, yes, but it needs points of centralization (again, this is market-based centralization) to carry out specific functions such as bringing many buyers and sellers together to trade in the case of exchanges. Those who think exchanges shouldn't exist, and Bitcoin should only be traded among P2P systems, are not thinking clearly, and don't understand how markets operate. And just as one exchange may hold "influence" on the market, it cannot control it. The same is true with the Foundation.
Do not fear private, voluntary organization among intelligent, productive people. Avoiding, or condemning, such organization is antithetical to Bitcoin progress. All the best Bitcoin successes will be brought about not by perfectly decentralized, independent action of individuals, but by the voluntary cooperation and structure each individual builds with others. The Foundation is just another example of this, and I'm excited to see the progress this structure will bring.
