[This is a response to this article by Big-Bubbler]
It's relatively simple.
Look in the Bitcoin Cash blockchain.
See which miners are donating from their block rewards to some BCH developer addresses.
Those are definitely pro-BCH miners.
Now, what about those that don't do this? Are they anti-BCH?
The answer is, not necessarily! It is not so simple to determine.
Some miners (or pools) might want to donate in more private ways. It is up to them whether they want to "prove"that they donated to further development (or any other kind of "helpful" activity).
I have no doubt quite a few miners, pools and big businesses already contribute a lot to BCH. And this isn't visible in the block coinbase transactions - although sometimes it manifests through the existence of blocks being mined in the first place, to defend the chain against attacks by hostile forces, or to occasionally restore funds which might be grabbed by anyone to their rightful original owners etc.
A key attribute of Bitcoin is that it is permissionless. This is part of how it stays robust against centralization, financial censorship, and capture by those who really oppose peer to peer electronic cash.
The miners do not need anyone's permission to create blocks, and they don't need anyone's permission to donate to anyone.
Neither does anyone else holding some Bitcoin Cash!
Everyone is able and free to prove that they support development, by showing their transactions on the chain.
NO - we should not expect them any more than we expect ourselves, as holders or as businesses building on BCH as payment infrastructure, to contribute to the development (financially or by actually doing the job).
But we should also expect them to donate, individually, as much as we ourselves contribute to the development (financially or by actually doing the job).
Why? Because we are ALL incentivized to do so!
Everyone's circumstances are different. Sometimes the miners make lots of money, sometimes they don't. The only thing that is sure is - when BCH is going up and profitable, everyone benefits. So everyone should contribute sometimes, even though not everyone can contribute all the time.
The blockchain provides all the tools necessary to develop, in a fair and encouraging* way, this great system that promotes economic freedom, greater independence and prosperity for all in the form of sound money.
There are many ways EACH of us can provide & show our contributions. They are not only by financial donations - although development of the system does require finances.
For those who claim that voluntary financing of public goods does not work well enough, I must point you at the last two decades, where a plethora of successful crowdfunding websites has emerged and is sustaining a huge industry of builders, makers, developers.
The successful among these creative platforms are built on ASSURANCE CONTRACTS (though they were mostly centralized, not executed as smartly as we could nowadays do with blockchains).
Via such crowdfunding platforms, I myself have supported, and with my own eyes seen come to fruition, from concept proposal to final delivery, many projects that I was keen to see come about.
In the crypto space, other coins like Monero and Ethereum are successfully using similar approaches to support their technological Research and Development.
Whenever we modify the protocol, we should do so with a clear understanding of the differences between monetary policy that underpins Bitcoin, and fiscal policy. The point at which the money is created falls under the former. How the coins are spent afterwards, is the latter. Public trust in Bitcoin depends to a huge degree on keeping to a sound monetary policy.
Let us not be shortsighted, and let us give voluntary funding approaches - which build on assurance contracts, a chance at success.
* encouraging: by demonstrating that work put in leads to rewards
Dominant Assurance Contracts (Wikipedia) - turns out assurance contracts can be made even better!
...and you will also help the author collect more tips.