So why did you quoted me and asked a question I have already answered?
If you don't understand something I wrote just say it....

We don't know how much people would be willing to donate. I have my doubts it would anything close to 100 dollars from a single user. More likely 15-20 dollars. Seen people mention their evaluations for their contributions as being in the double digit thousands for few months of work. If were looking at donations alone... i cant see anyone getting more 200 dollars in a single payout in their category.

I think it should be viewed as an honorarium in a sense for volunteer contributors. Unless the donations generating a substantial amount of money or there is TGC funds contributing.

but that's just my view of things.

GG will never be a cash cow for anyone,if people are being realistic with there demands for there work and want to help GG grow it will be good.lets hope it all works out,it can’t do any harm .

Dave

Ok so now all of a sudden it seems users want to vote on features ...
Well that's a turn up for the books isn't it

Personally I don't think it can be done that way ....
If we have a list like Lee suggested than it can cover a lot of areas .. Performance optimisation could cover a wide spectrum of things or AI improvements could be anything from climbing ladders to detecting footsteps ... The point is if someone like Corno_1 says I can do A,B,C and D with water then its up to TGC to work out what category that would come under " Miscellaneous " perhaps and use the funds from that pot ..

* A.I Improvements
* Performance Optimization
* Enhancements from Issues Tracker
* Bugs from Issues Tracker
* Miscellaneous

Just expecting to be able to fund the exact feature you want is unlikely via donations .. However if you mail Lee and say I can pay £500 for a specific projectile in Isometric for example then that may be something that Lee can arrange to be done ...
This is the difference between " Voluntary " Donations and paying for specific work ...
We must not confuse the two ... Donations cannot guarantee any specific feature ... Just work in that area you choose ..

If you want your money to go on something specific you can allways arange it with some one to do the work for you ,just be careful where you put your money .

Dave

I don't like the idea of donating money only to see general work in an area which might including simple bug fixing and general improvement.
The only case I would ever consider donating if there would be something really important waiting for funding.
I understand that votes don't guarantee anything, but what if there is multiple work waiting for funding in the same area? Of course there is no guarantee, but in case someone decide to put money in to a specific area and there is multiple features waiting for funding in that area, probably would like to have a word or two on what would like to see funded from the pot even if it not guaranteed.

As Teabone mentioned, we unlikely to see huge amount of donations, but in case I have no influence at all and I would be donating for work in general, the most I would consider donating is £5-£10 once in a while only. In case I do have some influence especially for more money, like 1 vote for £5 (10 for 50) I may consider donating £50-£100 per feature if it something I'm really want. Maybe it is not something everyone would do, but I would and maybe it would not guarantee anything but I would consider to pay more but only if it makes sense. Just look at the voting board, 10 years olds voting on useless features all the time and the real important improvement stay at the bottom because kids are happy with running around with the a rabbit. Well, I'm not. I want to see real development and I want some sort of influence for my money on what is being developed in case there would be multiple choices.

This system is intended to make donating easy it is not a replacement for voting for features or community discussions around what features will be added.

Discussions about what should be done next will happen in the forums (or via another system similar to the voting system). Once it is decided on what is next in each pot everyone will know what will happen if they donate to the selected pot and the pot will have description telling you.

It isn't going to be like you have no idea what will be done if you donate to each pot because a discussion will be happening with the community. If you want to donate money for a feature specifically talk about it in the community, a developer will come forward saying they can do it and TGC will let everyone know what pot will cover that work (or add one if required).

If there is big interested for one feature and it could be funded fast if a pot was added for it I am sure Lee would add one and let everyone know.

Also if you really want something that isn't on the list and are willing to donate for it, you can always email Lee he can find someone that can do it and add a pot so you can donate then remove it from the list once you have done so.

Having a system where everyone has a choice from the endless list of features that people want will just produce a lot of half funded features.

Then this is perfect for you ...
You don't need to pay a penny and still get the Benefit of those who want to
As The Next says you can approach Lee personally to pay for your own " Anything not on the list "
Then we get to benefit that as well Either way ... its a win win for everyone ..
Nothing Lost but lots to gain ..

I like that people have taken the initiative to work on things within their interests and capabilities. Asking someone to do something based off of limited donated funds, i find, we may be going backwards into people posting their estimates/evaluations of their worth. Those that feel undervalued. This only in the event that the donation system actually doesnt draw in respectful amount of money for someone to take on those tasks. Unless it was pre-existing volunteers whom didnt have an expectation of being paid in the first place. This system will work fairly fine in that case.

Shouldn't the contracted contributors (if that's still a thing) be the ones working on things based on TGC's requests and direction? I was hoping donations would help compliment what the volunteers are already doing. Or else its not a donation and more of a community paid contacts. I could be completely wrong about this however. Just me sitting here with a tin hat on about this topic. I'm not against paid features by the way. Just it seems there is two systems here possibly... donations and directly paid features?

I'm assuming the bug fixes will be handled by Lee, volunteers and internally contracted contributors?

Whatever is decided is fine be me. As long as Game Guru is always moving forward. Incredible work being done already since the Github launch.

EDIT: I have a mild form of dyslexia. Where as I respond too quickly without fully reading a thread and often go back to edit after a second read. So my apologizes to anyone who might be in the midst of replying to me with quotes that no long exist in my post here. Which tends to be the case.

I absolutely agree ..
Current contributors should be recognised for their efforts already and compensated for continued work.
After all that was what triggered the whole idea in the first place ... " PayPal Donation Button For Freelancer Help "

No I didn't meant to replace the current voting board and asking, requesting features by voting or anything like that.... If the whole voting system is making so much confusion just forget it. All I was talking about is an automated system so Lee don't need to worry about this whole donation game but in case he do want to worry about it and create pots on demand and move funds around and make decisions him self and ask people on forum regarding where the money should be spent it fine with me as long things are going forward and we are going to see more than bug fixes and multiple feature being developed simultaneously and we don't need to wait ages for bits and pieces.