IIRC, GIMP chose this path. Krita got serious about funding and GIMP didn't. Krita has two straightforward donation pages (https://krita.org/en/support-us/donations/ or https://fund.krita.org/) meanwhile GIMP discourages direct donation to the project (https://www.gimp.org/donating/)

In truth, GIMP maintainers deeply enjoy the control that "no strings attached"/"no obligation" development brings them. They've alienated most potential sponsors because they're happy with their lack of results. The missing funding angle only matters as an excuse for their own disorganization.

I haven't double checked but I think at least one of your listed names is banned from twitter.

> I haven't double checked but I think at least one of your listed names is banned from twitter.

Even if true, what does it have to do with anything? :)

Stole my response. At this point being banned from Twitter is a badge of honor in some circles.

I mean, anyone can report anyone for whatever and you will never reach tech support, because tech support at big social platforms never ever responds. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube are all the same. You have to have some serious connections to get a ban lifted.

Actually, I'm a former team member and my personal account is banned on Twitter (which I discovered when I tried to log in after half a year of absence). He could be thinking of me, in fact! :)

> GIMP is critically underfunded.

Not really, no. They have sufficient funds to hire several developers for several years full-time. They are just dragging their feet to organize themselves into a non-profit and start using those funds. The latest news is that they will probably finally announce a non-profit later this year. Hopefully.