I could see a Wikipedia-style donation model working to keep lots of different servers up. But I can't see it happening for servers hosting exclusively news + memes + whatever random communities people want to add.
I _could _ see it happening for dedicated broad-topic or semi-niche instances (instances for gaming, investing, Linux, music production, etc.) each hosting a collection of related and maybe more niche communities (for CSGO, Bitcoin, Arch, EDM production).
As they become more popular, server hosting costs increase, and at some point they might need to ask for donations to keep afloat. People are willing to throw a little money towards something they enjoy, especially if it's their choice to do so. And they feel good about it. And instances that stay around longer gain more users, more usability, more credibility (assuming a non-toxic community).
I could definitely see it leading down a path of growth and prosperity for the platform. However, now that I typed this out, I could see it both working positively, and being abused and exploited, so 🤷
You could argue that, but are these personal benefits not just checks from lobbyists? And does this power not come largely from the leverage they gain expanding their influence in order to justify bigger checks?