Gnangarra, you have been showing a lot of generosity towards the community and that is laudable. As you, over the years I have also spent countless hours in this community, and I do not regret it either, I feel it has been and it still is a good investment of my time, and my dedication. You, as me, are able to do all that because we are not financially disadvantaged. You are not in need of any donation, you can do what you are doing without support and that is great. However that you do not need those resources does not mean that other people might not need them.
Every volunteer can work in this community as long as their material needs are covered. If they cannot support themselves, we leave them to their own devices. That is totally opposite to cultivating a sense of community. In that regard I do not consider my comment disingenuous, but a reflection of what is common practice now. In my view if the community has resources, and a member of the community (more specifically, a dedicated member) needs them, then the community also should be generous with them, so that they don't have to leave.
When I imagine what would be my ideal case scenario, I would also avoid giving disadvantaged volunteers money, I would give them food and a place to stay instead, but since that is even harder to materialize (at least at this point of time given the geographic dispersion and lack of real estate), I feel that donating resources to volunteers (that in turn have been donated, remember that) is a good idea to further the sense of community.
I'm confused by your comment, can you please explain what makes you think that by donating to volunteers "they stop being volunteers in that aspect of what they do"?
Regards, Micru