Understanding this perspective will be a huge benefit to anyone who wants to contribute as a non-technical founder. About 6 years ago, at the end of undergrad, a technical friend and I started working on a project. I had made websites, built computers, dabbled in minor coding, but really wasn't that technical. I had no clue what to do and he probably wasn't comfortable giving direction. I left the project when I felt I couldn't make an equal contribution.

Working for six years made it obvious how valuable it is to be able to get things done offline, in a nontechnical way by planning, finding resources, etc.

Now I've become a lot more technical, the programmer of the office (VBA, ugh) to a programmer without caveats. Non-technical friends ask me to be their tech co-founder, but they have no clue how much work the technical side entails -- they probably still think freelance programmers should cost them $20/hr.

Also, non-tech friends will ask if they can help with my project. I can see what I would need in a non-tech founder, but a lot of times its hard to convey that to people. It's especially hard convey to someone how much effort you expend maintaining a codebase or implementing features to a non-technical person.

Best luck with Genghis and your co-founder search. I hate to be a downer, but personally, I'd never take a non-technical founder that I didn't know beforehand. It's hard enough to gauge the skill/reliability of a tech co-founder/freelancer (with structured, defined abilities and past projects). I wouldn't be comfortable assessing someone as a cofounder based on soft-skills. It's not a statement on their relative contribution, but more on my confidence in my own estimation.

*By technical, I'm also including people with domain knowledge.