Quote from: squatter on August 02, 2019, 08:49:07 PM

Quote from: pooya87 on August 02, 2019, 03:14:11 AM

Quote from: squatter on August 01, 2019, 08:23:03 PM

This is why I'm a small blocker. The inflation subsidy is quickly dwindling down. In just a few more halvings, it will hopefully be negligible compared to transaction fee revenue -- otherwise we might need to start worrying about major drops in hash rate, reorganization attacks, etc. Any increase to block size will lower fee revenues, so I'm definitely on the conservative side when considering them.

this is not necessarily true. because the relationship between revenue and fees is not that easily.
small blocks which means higher fees will also mean less users and stop of adoption and the result of that is falling price and finally less resulting revenue for miners.
on the other hand bigger blocks can mean more transactions in block which have a higher sum of fee instead of having individual high fees and it also means more adoption and the result of that is higher price and finally a much higher revenue for miners.

I don't think the bolded statement is a safe assumption to make. The fee market is a function of how full blocks are (at any size) -- it doesn't linearly aggregate fees as blocks get bigger. Increasing block size won't necessarily increase fee revenue because it will also reduce fee pressure by providing more block space. That means more transactions, more bloat and cheaper fees but not necessarily more revenue for miners to replace lost subsidy.

Let's assume that Bitcoin adoption is increasing, regardless of the transaction fees users need to pay. Then all else equal, keeping block weight limit static will increase fee revenue for miners. The same cannot be said if increased adoption (demand for block space) is being negated by increasing block sizes. In that situation, we're left hoping that speculative price increases are enough to incentivize miners.

i am talking about a balance between all these factors instead of an imbalance that damages bitcoin.
we need to increase the "capacity" so that it is capable of handling more users but at the same time we need to keep it at a level that both ensures decentralization and keeps the fee market to prevent cheap spam but not an outrageous fee market where fees reach unreasonable levels.

besides the arguments about fees and miners incentive doesn't belong here for at least another 10 years!