The idea is that everyone donates for a feature that would benefit all of us - The more people donate, the higher the amount of money the person that delivers will get.
I completely understand your idea, and it would be beneficial to have a system like this, but as Ash pointed out, when money is involved, things could/do get ugly. Also, the export to live/psn "feature" is more like a rewrite of construct, I was just pointing that out. You'd be better off just opening a Programmer for hire thread and individually asking for a certain feature at a fixed or variable price, but even with a 1on1 payment scheme, it could be hard to organize. Also, I have no idea how this commercial aspect would play into the mmf2 ordeal. IMO construct is best left completely commercial free, aside from plugin sales if there be any. Also, paid modifications to construct itself might split the versioning into two or more seperate branches if say, a new group of money-oriented devs enters the mix and makes you that live/psn version of construct. Ash/Rich/Davids real version will continue follow their path while your version will stay non-updated. If an unforseen bug arises in your version, who's to say that your paid team is required to fix it for free?