Ok, so if you accept that the blocksize is not the only solution to the problem, then would you also accept that your guess for the rate of block size increase can only be sensibly made when the overall context you are applying it to is known? i.e. design first how you intend to mitigate the problems that bigger blocks bring, then you come up with your goldilocks increase curve?
I think you changed the wording a bit. I said no to this:
...you believe the whole thing scales up using block size increases only. Is this really what you're implying?
Which I took to mean that "I accept that off-chain solutions
could play a role in the future to help with scaling." I never meant to imply that I believed there could be a solution that doesn't involve blocksize scaling
at all. I think regardless of the role played by off-chain solutions, we must scale up the blocksize for all the good reasons DeathAndTaxes lists
here. Only later will we find out how much demand there is for off-chain TXs.
Sorry, I didn't mean off-chain solutions at all, the contenders there are perhaps too experimental and unproven to be planned around at this stage. I will refine the question: do you think bitcoin scales up to it's widest potential user base (everyone) using only block size increases, and remain peer to peer? We're all aware that's not possible, no?