This is a very important social experiment we're running here with FIBRE
as it has profound implications as to the mass adoption potential of crypto in general ..

Crypto currency startups are initially funded via IPO/ICO for POS coins or via a pre-mine
in the case of POW coins .. A very few projects are initially self-funded by the dev team or
are lucky enough to have an angel/whale investor willing to underwrite the launch and
initial development of a given project .. The existing funding options require a large dose
of 'trust' from the investors and we've all witnessed/suffered from the potential for fraud and
abuse inherent in the process to date  .. And .. at some point .. they ALL run out of MONEY ..

Perhaps we should focus on the 'end game' to help identify the best funding techniques
to facilitate getting there .. It's easier to see the path if we all have a clear vision of the goal ..
Presumably, we're all trying to create transaction networks that are secure, easy to use, feature
rich, adaptable, self funding, and mass adoptable .. At some point these networks must be self
sustaining or they will ultimately fail and they have to survive in the marketplace long enough
to achieve a "network effect" to attract necessary VC funding to go to the next level ..

Of the options presented in the poll option B makes the most sense to me ..

We have FIBRE ( v1.0 )  with a proven feature set and attributes but need additional funding ..
We 'rebrand' FIBRE ( v1.0 ) via an ICO as FIBRE ( v2.0 ) with all the existing features of FIBRE (v1.0 ) at launch ..
New investors will willing pay a higher market cap for FIBRE ( v2.0 ) because of the existing features at launch ..
Additionally, provide a small financial 'incentive' to existing FIBRE (v1.0 ) holders to 'convert' to FIBRE ( v2.0 ) ..
Rinse and repeat as necessary ( ie ) there may need to be subsequent funding rounds that would
require the creation of a FIBRE ( v3.0 ) and/or FIBRE (v4.0 ) to reach the ultimate  'goal' ..

Just throwing it out there ..

Triff ..