I’ll do my best to not trail off into existential glory here. The question is about who is with Nu and who is against Nu. There are many facets to this question, and I’ll try to address several. For each, I will look with a micro-viewpoint and try to avoid the big picture until the end. Please note that this is not a declaration of war, and one can easily find themselves on many sides of the fence at different stages or in different contexts. No one is evil, and neither is Nu.
#Economically
The Peg
This one’s easy. Everyone on buy side is on Nu’s side. Everyone on ask side is trying to take something back from Nu. This can even be seen if we blind ourselves to the outside world and assume everyone only has nushares and nubits:
Shareholders that are trying to buy nubits are on the side of Nu. Nubit holders that are trying to buy shares are against Nu.
This is because giving up shares for bits is equivalent to giving up power for gold. Reducing your amount of power while simultaneously increasing demand for the currency is on the side of Nu.
Minting and Parking
This one’s trickier. We want participants in the governing process. It makes for a stronger and more powerful network. Those that are looking to stop minting are doing a great disservice to Nu. On the other side, parking has both benefits and detriments; however, ultimately Nu wants the network to respond by parking bits when it raises park rates, so since shareholders determine the park rates the action of an individual parking is considered a boon. Here, we are saying:
A minter is great, but a parker isn’t bad either.
BTC
And this is the fully complex reality. This category will open up to other currencies as further trading pairs develop. If a minter stops minting, they will enter a state where they need to pick between opportunities. One is to park NBT, the other is to exit the system. And this leads to a fundamental economic truth:
Anyone entering the system is with Nu, anyone exiting is against.
#The Network
Marketing
Good marketing works on many levels. It doesn’t have to be perfect or even correct, it just has to hit on positive strokes rather than negative ones and simply exist enough to get the word out there and stick in peoples minds. We also want to be cautious here about the effects on other categories by specifying the negative because dissonance can be a very healthy thing.
Anyone that interacts with Nu and does not leave a resoundingly negative vibe is on Nu’s side.
Attackers and Workers
While at first glance it may seem like attackers are bad and workers good, there are accounts for the opposite to occur. An unsuccessful attack bolsters resolve and potentially makes the network stronger by exposing weakness. On the other hand, a worker who is too proliferous may outpace the market and end up costing more in grants than they bring in. So instead of using the words ‘bad’ and ‘good’, let us use words that describe how the jobs are done.
Prudent workers and inept attackers are good for Nu.
Shareholders and Markets
What makes a good shareholder is just as complex as what makes a good market. Generally, activity is a good sign, though it can sometimes be a signal of crisis.
Nu thrives on the backs of persistent markets and shareholders.