Georgem, why is it that you are framing the miners as the receivers of a tax and the service nodes as the tax leviers?

For example - In the instance of say, me wanting you to stop smoking because you're "ruining my clean air". I (tax levier) frame you (tax recipient) as the damager to the air. However, equally I impose damages on to you because I would be stopping you from smoking. And you as a smoker (tax recipient) would decry "He's taking away my right to smoke!" framing me as the bad guy (tax levier)

Really what this comes down to is attempting to find an optimal way for the network (society) to operate under. I'm skeptical that either party by itself will be better at determining that through their votes.

Perhaps a series of votes on each side would be better?

It might be also important to note that obviously my example is representative of two parties that have behaviours mutually exclusive of each other. A smoker won't want to take away his own right to smoke. nor will non-smokers want to smoke if they want others to stop smoking.

This won't be the case with SPR, because miners can mine and run service nodes & vice versa. I don't like the idea of pitting them against each other.