I have read
DooMAD's proposal now and I like it a bit. It would give less powers to miners as they only can vote for small block size increases, but would eliminate the need for future hardforks. The only problem I see is that it could encourage spam attacks (to give incentives to miners to vote higher blocksizes) but spam attacks will
stay as expensive as they are today will be even more expensive than today because of the "transaction fees being higher than in last period" requirement, so they are not for everyone.
Code them up together, but allow each component to be activated *separately* thus allowing clients to choose which component they wish to support... I suspect support for BIP102 will be a lot higher now (yes I know about quadratic scaling issue.)
That certainly sounds like a good idea, if the community decides to support this proposal. Would Core allow to activate that kind of compromise proposal coded into a real pull request?