There have been several attempts to create "tip jars" for open source that automatically split a total commitment across multiple projects or developers. Sever

There have been several attempts to create "tip jars" for open source that automatically split a total commitment across multiple projects or developers. Several ran aground on implementation issues like money transmitter regulation and payment processing. But even when the systems worked well and stayed out of trouble, they just didn't see that much money flowing through. Two subspecies of the tip jar rose to public prominence in the last few years. Crowdfunding sites like Patreon focus on perks. Both legally and practically, they eschew "donation", partly to avoid money transmission issues, partly because people are just more likely to give money for something in return, rather than gratuitously. Open software coders who've done well via these platforms number very few and often offer substantial perks that appeal to "enterprise" customers at high tiers. Sites like OpenCollective focus on raising for groups, rather than individuals. The amounts committed to groups can sometimes reach significant looking totals in the thousands of dollars, but splitting among contributors often cuts the per-individual number down significantly. The transparency and other groupware features put social pressure on individual developers not to take too much.