I think the point was that they are asking for $$$ by having a "Free vs. Pro" business model (i.e. people pay $$$ for Pro), so where does the need for a Kickstarter campaign come from?
Because to have the free stuff, you need to dev it. To dev it, you need money to eat while you dev. So they ask money to live now, while they can code the free stuff.
When you have a "Free vs. Pro" model, you usually structure it so that the Free version is subsidized by the money from the Pro version. So I don't think it's outrageous to be confused by someone having such a model, and yet still needing a Kickstarter campaign.
That's not to say there is something wrong with it. It just seems confusing at face value.
I'm not really sure why the idea is such a foreign concept to the point where you need to insinuate that I think that Free software "falls from the sky" or some such nonsense.
Because it causes burnout. You can't write open-source software as your primary day job well. There's too much risk.
You can, however, do it as a function of your work for your employer. Almost all of today's viable FOSS started like this, because it provides the financial security and moral support you need to bring a FOSS to maturity.
Good thing they're selling a product then, not asking for a handout. And hey, as a bonus, they're releasing a fully refreshed set of icons for free!
Your perspective on what open-source can/should be is utterly unrecognizable to me. I'm glad it seems like the majority of people are finally getting comfortable with the idea that you shouldn't have to choose between making a living and contributing to the open source ecosystem.
