Technically yes, they could shift spending like that, but it would look bad enough, I think at least some would help where you want. Either way, asking for them not to shift funding as appropriate would be asking to control other finances not your own.
If they allowed targeted donations to firefox/quantum/rust/MDN I would donate, as I'm sure many other will. As it is, I don't and won't even if firefox were to fail.
What you are saying as you don't want to fund your future because you are mad that other people fund their features.
Re:The cult of the free must die
by MaxBarraclough on Thursday August 13, 2020 @09:16AM
(#24143004)
In the case of Mozilla, it's more than the money can go to one of two places: Firefox development, or the black-hole of Mozilla's other projects and expenditures, including their overpaid leadership.
What I’m saying is that there are lots of charities working toward a future I think is really good. I’d rather donate there.
I’m not mad at anyone, I just want my donations to do as much good as I think they can do.
For example, consider two features: AwesomeFeature - budget has $100 DumdumFeature - budget has $200
They currently receive $300 in donations, $50 of which have no strings attached. So there’s donation stream A with strings and $250, and donation stream B with no strings and $50.
Allocation looks like this: AwesomeFeature - budget has $100, funded with A$75, B$25 DumdumFeature - budget has $200, funded with A$175, B$25.
If I donate $25 and say “this can only go to awesome feature” the budgets after my donation end up as.
AwesomeFeature - budget has $100, funded with A$100 DumdumFeature - budget has $225, funded with A$175, B$50.