Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. And the problem with #4 is that in trying to round up people the community trusts/knows by name, you're also going to end up bringing in people that have personal and professional connections that could also game the system.
True, but is that necessarily a problem? We definitely don't have the product figured out to 100% just yet, but the assumption is that people are quicker to support (and give their email if it's secured) than to pay (a la kickstarter). The rest of the details, we surely have to figure out. That's why I've got the link here, for amazing feedback like the original comment we're both replying to :)
1. User X (a non-technical) posts an idea that gets a little traction, but not enough for them to feel confident enough to build it out, especially when it means finding a team to do so.
2. Named Techie sees the project, likes the premise a lot, and knows User X doesn't have the resources.
3. Named Techie's friends post their concept with beautiful mockups and a more defined description and Named Techie highlights the project and it hits the front page -or- Named Techie's friends just launch the site without needing the validation, and through their network are able to have a fairly successful launch.
4. User X sees this, rages all across the internet, and you get bad press (and more trolls to boot).
In the event that Named Techie has the advantage of seeing all of these new concepts coming in and the public only sees them once they're approved by him, that's going to spawn some conflict of interests.
Even if all entries are public, you'll run into what we see on Show HNs.. like the one for 2u.fm yesterday where some idiot thought it would be a good idea to reply to as many people as possible who liked the concept to tell them that it was a complete ripoff of some other site (which it wasn't) or all of the people that constantly hate on the fact that someone would even think their project was a good idea.
Additionally, most of the concepts on the site aren't going to be exclusive to the person that's posting them, and having to deal with trolls or 'ownership' wars isn't something I'd want to bother with. Trying to fight this by only allowing members with some form of 'clout' to comment creates the issue I have with Kickstarter, where until you've put money into the project, you can't ask a question about it publicly.
I'm also concerned that too many people will place too much weight on the feedback they receive. The idea may very well be game-changing, but there's no way to know unless it's fully fleshed-out. Knowing how people react to having their dreams shattered, I just don't think this site is a good idea. If you really need validation, use a site like Reddit with a broad enough userbase (or a specific subreddit) to get the feedback you need.