In fact, we already have. It was my decision that PG should out me as moderator, and that was mainly so I'll be able to answer users' questions.
I think your points are mostly correct and entirely understandable. Qua user, I feel pretty similarly, so I don't anticipate much trouble seeing eye to eye about this in the long run. I'm optimistic that we can eventually please both the bulk and the core of the communitythough that will still be far from everybody.
Also, there's no one on the team arguing for secrecy. The question is not whether to be more transparent, but how.
A few points from the moderation side.
You should know that what appears to be HN's "secrecy" has in reality mostly been extremely limited bandwidth. For most of HN's existence, PG ran it at the same time as he was building YC plus having two kids. That made for an awful lot of dropped packets. One might argue that he should have handed HN off sooner, and one would in my opinion be completely wrong about that. Without HN's "secrecy" there would have been no HN.
Second, it's been true for a long time that you can get answers by emailing info@yc. (We're going to change that to hn@yc, but that's not up yet; I'll add it to my profile when it is.) I'll be taking over the HN-related emails from Tara, who has been valiant but will soon be relieved.
I intend to be a lot more responsive in the threads, partly because we know that community concerns around transparency need addressing, so we'll make a priority of it, but also for two non-obvious reasons: (1) I've written software for navigating and moderating HN very quickly, and (2) I type faster than PG.
Beyond that, there are a lot of questions about how to get this right. Many of the factors aren't obvious. I have more to say about this, but this comment is long enough, plus I'm tired and my brain hurts, and we'll have lots of opportunities to discuss it further.
All three are for bootstrapped businesses. All three also have incredibly useful and non-fluffy videos of their past speakers online, well worth watching even if you can't attend the actual events.
And keep the faith -- the VC model has tremendous drawbacks for many people, especially those of us who are not willing to essentially become indentured servants. Bootstrapping is highly underrated.
I went through a similar SEP program in Toronto. I am again considering similar program in WA state for my bootstrapped business.
Following resources can help you identify appropriate programs and mentoring:
Small Business Administration http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/starting-ma...
SCORE http://www.score.org
Small Business Development Center http://www.wsbdc.org if you are WA state, I am sure other states have similar program)
For example for some companies the VC seed funding that an accelerator provides may not be crucial, but the access to business advice, mentors and contacts could be. This generally costs equity - would this be something you'd be after? Are you after no costs, or less costs than the typical startup in an incubator? Why would an entrepreneur want to invest their time but not their money?
Unsure of if you are looking for a peer group to help you through the highs and lows or a PR plan (accelerator graduates rarely have a huge splash, it is all about habits formed and community support).
Also heard several good things from startups who were part of Microsoft Accelerator ( https://www.microsoftventures.com/ )
http://www.quora.com/Sramana-Mitra-1
Disclosure: I have no affiliation with them.
I think they shut it down eventually. Find more in old discussions - https://hn.algolia.com/?q=nreduce#!/story/forever/0/nreduce
I, would be happy, if I could join an experienced and older team and start working on an interesting problem. Doing my M.Sc. in CompSci in Germany atm. and none of my friends has any entrepreneurial ambitions or skills, which is depressing and sad. All of them just want a job in the industry. Not really expecting payment.