(1) People who make things (of any kind) publicly available are often not clear on how the public perceives them. It can be helpful to let them know.
(2) This fellow has obviously put a lot of work into the program. But there are limits on how far development by one person, in their spare time, is likely to go. There are two reasonably sustainable development models: establish a clear funding stream by charging for the product, or release the source code and do open development. This fellow is doing neither. If people admire this work, and want it to continue to be developed, then they have an incentive to encourage the original developer to switch to a more sustainable model.
and ...
(3) Is there anything wrong with offering a trade? "I'd like it if you did X. If you do, then I'll give you money."
I agree with everything you said. But this isn't what's happening in this thread. In this thread, a random, semi-anonymous person saw that someone was offering their work for free and asking for donations, and planted their feet firmly in the ground and let everyone know that they refuse to donate unless the code is licensed in exactly the way they like.
"I absolutely refuse to do Y, unless you do X exactly the way I want it done."
The above two are making essentially the same statement. The difference is one of attitude. And the attitude behind a short online text message, is something very easy to misinterpret -- or so recent history suggests, IMHO.
When you say I'm semi-anonymous, I assume you didn't bother to even click on the profile link. There you'll find more than enough to send me a pizza, if you are so inclined. I do not hide and I am very public about my opinions.
In fact, I think this project, being closed, is a disservice to the craft of software creation. It's great work and, yet, all we can see is its results rendered on a screen. It's also limited to a single operating system and CPU architecture. Opening it up would enrich other groups and allow it to be enriched by them.
I place no unreasonable condition on my donation. In fact, it's my donation and no legally allowed condition should be deemed unreasonable.
(1) People who make things (of any kind) publicly available are often not clear on how the public perceives them. It can be helpful to let them know.
(2) This fellow has obviously put a lot of work into the program. But there are limits on how far development by one person, in their spare time, is likely to go. There are two reasonably sustainable development models: establish a clear funding stream by charging for the product, or release the source code and do open development. This fellow is doing neither. If people admire this work, and want it to continue to be developed, then they have an incentive to encourage the original developer to switch to a more sustainable model.
and ...
(3) Is there anything wrong with offering a trade? "I'd like it if you did X. If you do, then I'll give you money."