[chupapimunyenyo]

I agree with this. If you use some software (and its author cares about internet points), you can at least give it that star. It's better than paying with money, and if you are requesting a feature it makes even more sense to pay with a single click of a mouse. Show some appreciation, people

[tetromino_]

It seems ludicrous to have to star a project for lacking a feature you need. What's next, starring projects for having glaring security problems?

[chupapimunyenyo]

The person that asked for the feature clearly uses the project and this is usually the case. USERS of a project ask for features

[moron4hire]

The person in the linked GitHub repo is not asking the maintainers to develop the feature. They are asking if the maintainers would like the issue author to develop the feature. That's what is particularly disgusting to me about this star-begging-bot.

[actionfromafar]

They are asking the maintainers to take the time to evaluate and possibly shepherd a patch into the mainline. It may or may not work out in the end. Everything has a cost, not the least, opportunity cost.

“Libre” is not “gratis” and all that.

[MrDresden]

I have starred plenty of projects that lack features that I would have liked or needed them to have.

They were still of use to me, and in cases did implement those features later on.

[johnnyanmac]

No. I'm not going to break my own user pattern (I use stars as bookmarks, that's it. and I unstar pretty aggressively once I've done my business) to satisfy someone's ego. I'd much rather give a donation or bounty than go through that emotional manipulation. At least giving money is a business-neutral way to show demand for a feature (for a product I may or may not like).

Also, as a rebellious streak I am much less likely to star something that already has (proportionately) a bunch of stars.