By using a Storjcoin you are building a ecosystem outside MaidSafe and thus directly damaging MaidSafe. Why do you think that you will be able to use the Safe network for storaging files that you charge for?
MaidSafe is in no way getting your userbase since you are making them use Storjcoin and therefore it's not a symbiotic relationship, as you suggested, but rather a parasitic one.
While I see what your trying to say that we should only use Safecoins because that is the best bet, but let me break it into node structure perhaps we could shed some light. Am I correct under this assertion?
Your system:
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node A - Payments in Safecoin - Running on Maidsafe Network
Under my proposed system:
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node B - Payments in Safecoin - Running on the Maidsafe Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node C - Payments in Bitcoin(Safecoins only used for storage) - Running on the Maidsafe Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node D - Payments in Storjcoin(Safecoins only used for storage) - Running on the Maidsafe Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node E - Payments in US Dollars(Safecoins only used for storage) - Running on the Maidsafe Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node F - Payments in Storjcoin - Running on the Storj Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node G - Payments in Bitcoin(Storjcoin only used for storage) - Running on the Storj Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node H - Payments in Safecoin(Storjcoin only used for storage) - Running on the Storj Network
"Dropbox" Application Running on Node I - Payments in US Dollars(Storjcoin only used for storage) - Running on the Storj Network
The nodes will pretty much run all the exact same software except their payment modules will be different, or their data storage modules. Using the Storjcoin blockchain as the "universal language" all nodes can communicate. Therefore if I store a file on Node B, and can retrieve it on Node I without a problem. If another decentralized storage protocol comes along, we need only create a new data storage module, and launch some new nodes. Node only needs to turn a profit to stay alive. As market forces, and technology changes so will the advantages and disadvantages of running on certain types of nodes.
Bitcoin could have a huge speculative rise or fall impacting the price of cryptocurrencies. In that case nodes E and I would be relatively unaffected. A large amount of resource miners could be added to the Storj networking making it much cheaper to store on the Storj Network. Other nodes can buy space from Nodes F-I.
If your assertions are correct then Node B will achieve the greatest profit. But that doesn't also mean that nodes C-I can't appeal to their own niche markets(through alternate UIs and use cases) and make a reasonable profit as well. Storjcoin holders benefit across all nodes and platforms.
Under this plan we still hit your 1-6, but we also created a bunch of "alt" options as well. Its almost if like Bitcoin lauched, then added Bitcoin-B(litecoin), and Bitcoin-C(peercoin). We make all possible "competing" protocols interoperable with the core network. In that way we keep network effect even though markets and technologies might change.
The market will decide which technologies(nodes) we build. We don't have to have any preconceived notion that a protocol or technology will work the way we hope it will work.
Does the Dark Side have cookies?