I couldn’t agree more.
Something not mentioned here is the power dynamic that would necessarily develop between posters who frequently get paid and the site admins/owners. A funding model like this puts the individual first, not the community, and the resulting consequences are likely to become extremely unhealthy for all involved.
If the admins are dependent on these payments, it is reasonable to believe they will want to ensure that those payments continue. Let’s say there is a prolific poster who nets a fair amount of money from their posts, such that if the poster stopped creating content, it would be felt by the admins. What would happen if the poster made a demand of the admins that would be considered unreasonable by any other ordinary user? This puts the admins in a difficult position - do they capitulate to the poster in order to preserve the income that poster brings in? Even if there is not an explicit threat from the poster that they’d leave, and even if the poster isn’t making demands that are unreasonable, this dynamic still exists. Whether they like it or not, the admins become incentivized to begin catering to the highest income posters.
The same could be said for posters who are paid primarily by one or a small number of high income users. How could that impact the content of the poster? What if users begin to doubt the content that the poster is creating, thinking they’re some sort of paid shill? What if the poster really does become a paid shill? These are very real things that can tear a community apart, even if we think ours is built different and no one would possibly do such a thing. Money changes things, deeply!