Just to be clear you're talking about something completely separate from this threads OP right? Creating a new type of delegate and organizing the current delegates into some sort of foundation seem like two very different topics.
Same topic. Different idea. Similar threads linked.
Hmm OK I think I see.
I'm assume with organizing current delegates you could build a foundation of sorts, then have a delegate propose say a plan to implement a marketing strategy and organize the collection of funds from the pay of multiple delegates through this collective.
Thinking about it a bit more I find pooling delegate funds for larger initiatives problematic in that there doesn't seem to be a way with the current system to transparently see where the funds for each delegate go. Even if voters could vote out delegates that propose plans they don't like that they get funded by other delegates, it would be better if they could vote out everyone involved in the scheme. By having each delegate campaign separately it makes it easier for voters to see how well each delegate is performing based on their own stated goals that got them elected to the top 101 in the first place.
Then again, for now it appears users seem to be fine letting delegates do whatever they want for the most part. A delegate organization would probably function fine and in light of current stakeholder voter apathy might even get more done but I don't think it would serve in the spirit of what the delegates meant to represent when DPOS was designed.
Maybe what people want is for their delegates to communicate amongst themselves and come up with their own best strategies to utilize delegate funds to help build up BitsharesX, rather than be bothered with having to get involved themselves. Will be interesting to get more perspectives on the subject from others.