Friends, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. The amount of people second guessing whether a "configuration file" is worth $2,000 is exactly why even the m

Friends, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. The amount of people second guessing whether a "configuration file" is worth $2,000 is exactly why even the most popular open source packages rely on corporate buy in to justify development time. Where do we set the fence posts? "It's just a CSS file" for Bootstrap? "It's just a packaging system" for Webpack? Who cares? If it saves you hundreds of hours of development time, then it's a net benefit for you, and you should pay it back. The fact that nobody has asked you to do so until now does not mean you weren't supposed to do it before. You should, but you didn't, so now OSS maintainers have to put ads in your donation's place. If you do already donate to open source - great! Set the OPEN_SOURCE_CONTRIBUTOR flag to true and be on with your day. If we ignore `standard` and the controversy behind its "simplicity" - would you be mad if Vue came out with this model? Bootstrap? What about Webpack or ESLint itself? Would you trade ads in the CLI in exchange for no corporate chokehold on your favorite packages? How about funding many thousands of solo developers who don't have corporate backing but can theoretically justify working on their useful packages if they were able to afford monthly expenses from it?