I don't know, but you are saying we shouldn't do anything, because doing something might not be quite enough?
I'm saying that the pretense that 1 MBers are playing central bankers seems funny in the light
considering most block increase proponents are the ones arguing for arbitrary control of supply. really? I must have missed something along the way, couldyou please share pointers to evidence on which the bolded claim is based? (serious question)
Blocksize limit = supply.
Unless you advocate lifting it completely most block increase suggestions amounts to a control of supply based on projected demand.
(of course 1MB is an equally arbitrary quota but that is beside the point I was making)
you know what I can't stop thinking that the max block size is a transport layer constraint that have crept in consensus layer.
So I'd say that yes "space" in the blockchain is a scarce resource (*), hence you need to pay a price for it (i.e. txs fee), but to me the max block size mustn't be used to determine (or influence) the price of such resource .
Bitcoin tokens emission process (miner subsidy) and free market should be the main forces in the blockchain space price discover mechanism.
(*) scarcity is directly connected to bitcoin trustlessness