Paywalls seem to not actually be guaranteeing resources for journalism, in practice. If you mean "In the cases where paywalls work, ..." then sure. But that's exactly my point - what is a rational, profit-seeking, red-blooded, capitalist company to do when asking for donations is more likely to make money than selling goods and services?

I don't understand what the risk of subsidizing free riders is. Is subsidizing free riders a bad thing?

I don't understand why donors having fewer checks matters. Do donors have less power than customers of a paywall?