Hacktoberfest 2026: the issues maintainers tagged for October, open and beginner-friendly. Browse Hacktoberfest issues

marketing: give sponsorship a unit and an independence policy

Open Beginner friendly
  • Is something wrong?
#151 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Maintainers usually reply within 1 day

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
2/5
Estimated time
1-3 hours
Newbie friendliness
72/100
Issue type
Documentation
Clarity
Clearly specified
Activity status
Active
Tech stack
github, javascript
Domain
documentation

Research direction

Read the Support section in README.md, the publishers page, and .github/FUNDING.yml; compare their current wording with the monthly re-verify cadence in CONTRIBUTING.md and site/README.md. Update the funding and independence wording and any tiers so they agree on what sponsorship funds, what it cannot influence, and how sponsors are disclosed. Done when Support states those boundaries and FUNDING tiers match.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

community marketing priority: low

Why it matters

A links-only CC0 catalog has one thing worth paying for (independent, dated licence reads) and one thing it must never sell (placement). Neither is written down, so a potential sponsor cannot tell what the money does and a sceptical reader cannot tell what it does not do. The sponsor button is on every page.

Evidence (at 69387df)

  • README.md:391-393 "Support": "If the catalog saves you time, you can sponsor TMHSDigital on GitHub. Entirely optional." .github/FUNDING.yml lists github: [TMHSDigital] only. The sponsor button appears in the nav and footer of every page (shared.mjs:116, entry-page.mjs:134,168, category-page.mjs:39,58).
  • Nothing in README, CONTRIBUTING or docs states that ranking, featured, stack picks and status are not influenced by sponsorship, or how a vendor's sponsorship would be disclosed. CONTRIBUTING.md:84-86 covers self-listing but not paying.
  • The re-verify cadence is the natural unit: CONTRIBUTING.md:77-79 and site/README.md:158-167 describe a monthly batch of about 40 licence re-reads.

Suggested approach

A short "Funding and independence" paragraph in README Support (and the publishers page): what sponsorship funds (the monthly re-read batch, the link check), what it never buys (position, featured, active, a stack pick), how sponsors are disclosed (a list in README, no logos on entries). Add one or two Sponsors tiers phrased as "funds one monthly re-verify batch". Add a second rail to FUNDING.yml (Open Collective or thanks.dev) only if a studio needs to expense it.

Done when

The Support section says what money funds and what it cannot change; FUNDING tiers match that wording.

Dominant language
JavaScript
Stars
58
Forks
15
Avg merge
16h 53m
Merged PRs (30d)
14

Getting set up

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from TMHSDigital/Free-Game-Dev-Assets

All issues in TMHSDigital/Free-Game-Dev-Assets

Similar issues

More JavaScript issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.