I'm only going to make one comment on this thread:
If you use this thread to make disparaging comments about Shanley, you're missing the point and you're doing it wrong. Go look at how respectfully I tried to treat Shanley when she gave me tons of crap, and then go do the same thing. Shanley's abuse does not make your abuse okay.
You made this "open letter" knowing it's a lightning rod to abuse her. Since that was a predictable outcome of your action, you share responsibility in abuse.
I resent you leading abuse against her, especially when we give you our money... to give to decent people.
I resent you piling onto her (ironically from Medium) while her account is protected due to other attacks.
I resent your "need" to do so PUBLICLY to someone who suffers threats of violence for fundamentally improving the world. Your reason: "because my resentment is my problem, and I need to express it to you".
I resent you THANKING people who call your top users (like her) "professional victims" -- yet you "resent" it when important criticism is turned onto you.
This seems entirely unfair. She publicly and viscously attacked him for not running his company (which paid her) in a way that best suited his interests.
When he responds with "You hurt my feelings when you did X" he is piling on and contributing to her abuse? Her attitude would've hurt my feelings. There seem to be no acceptable avenues through which to attempt any sort of conflict resolution with Shanley. White men are just expected to be silent and let her disparage any work they do that doesn't meet her world view.
Thank you Chad, for making the world a better place with your work. I disagreed with how you implicitly supported a sexist comment on HackerNews but I think that is a forgivable offense and that the good you do with Gittip far outweighs the negative of that action.
After I made this comment this I realized that the best thing might be to connect you with the people who do bizdev at the WMF. ;) I've already sent them an email, I'll be in touch soon.
Also, the 'full disclosure agreement' is just an inside joke. But, a real-world example. Facebook was creating topic pages, and they wanted to seed them with Wikipedia content. While our bizdev person was arranging that, they refused to sign NDAs. So every time they visited Facebook, the people at FB erased every whiteboard they might see coming or going.
I think that might give you a good indication of what you're up against when it comes to openness and corporate partnerships, but also some hope that other arrangements are still possible.
It's a design decision, not a tax/regulatory issue. We've had one-off tipjars for decades and they haven't changed the game. My mortgage is recurring so my income needs to be recurring as well.
We currently have an "Other Ways to Give" on your profile where you can link a bitcoin address or Venmo account. That's an outlet for one-offs. We may mix in first-class one-offs eventually but we're not in a rush. See https://github.com/gittip/www.gittip.com/issues/5.
Gittip is a site for multiple communities, not one single community, so I take it as a sign of strength that we do in fact have multiple communities using Gittip now. Think along the lines of PayPal or Twitter: they are a big tent.