I expect that many people like me will think "I'd like to donate. But I don't want to do it every week" so that's why people are donating in the .1-1BTC range rather than the 0.01 x hundreds of people version you were hoping for.
Like, for myself, I donated 0.1 thinking of it as ~$15 USD and thinking "that's my contribution for the next month or two, let's see how this goes". And then if I think you're providing me a really valuable service and I enjoy the show, I can do the same again later.
Of course, once automated payment systems are up and running, that would be a great option for micropayments
![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
Comment on the content: the ID-tied-to-BTC-address concept is excellent. There seems to be a connection with the Namecoin concept and what Julian Assange was saying to Eric Schmidt in that transcript.
Your concerns about tying monetary value to speech are valid, and I am worried about that too, but I believe/hope they will be addressed by the free market. That is to say, just as now people can interact via facebook if they want to, or on an open forum with anonymous login if they want to, so in the future fora will form based on BTC identities for those who see value in that (avoidance of spam and fraud or anything else), and other fora will form with other user groups in mind. There is no need to try and regulate anything away.
At a deeper level, I think the "ID in BTC" concept, like the "smart property" concept has great philosophical significance for the way society develops from here. I have an idea in my mind based around reification, Platonic ideals and entropy but that's for another time...