Re: If not a "store of value" or "medium of exchange" ...
you're ignoring the quadratic hashing problem. segwit specifically fixed this and expanded block space for transactions that don't worsen the problem. you also know this was done as a compromise so bitcoin could have bigger blocks but still allow for large-transaction use cases. the best of both worlds in other words, vs a crude sigops limit:
Quote
Removing the quadratic scaling of hashed data for verifying signatures makes increasing the block size safer. Doing that without also limiting transaction sizes allows Bitcoin to continue to support payments that go to or come from large groups, such as payments of mining rewards or crowdfunding services.
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/
not fixed. people can still use legacy transactions which still have the problem of bloating up a block
which is why legacy transactions are still subject to the same limit as before segwit. this is not a problem at 1MB base block size. it's also not a problem for linearly scaling sigops---thus the compromise to increase block size for linearly scaling sigops.
those wanting to bloat a block wont use segwit.
so what? as long as we don't increase the base block size, this isn't a problem. and they'll pay a hefty price for the trying too: legacy transactions cost >40% more than bech32 segwit transactions. the fee market punishes would-be spammers.
'groups/crowds' dont deserve a whole block to themselves of only 5 tx's if people want to be paid it should be done as multiple batches.
i disagree. this should be a free market mechanism to whatever extent possible. if they are willing to outbid other users, they should be able to get their transactions confirmed first.