So this who issues - is a restatment of should we scale blocksize.

segwit2x was shot down
BCH market price has tanked
BSV has tanked

Though it think that is market recognition.

I argued with LK  on this  - that there must be some g(x) where block size gets bigger as the internet gets faster and HD space get cheaper, which is has since 2010.

Satoshi's intial idea was to sacel block size and the blocks were 32mb each

The 1MB cap was instutided as stop gap measure only.

It is clear that all the high TPS and super cheap coins run into L1 centralisation issues, but normies dont get this they just want to hear TPS high and cheap.

EOS is a demostration where you could not keep up with the rate of increase of the blocks and so end up with centralisation.

DAGS - may offer some solution but I have yet to see a convinicing proof.

The imuutable fact is data costs space and energy to store.

The 1MB size does ensure that dentralisation is high, but reaches a crunch point where - minners see fees drop off.

At some point the Blocksize should increase and there is some g(x)

Where this is up for question, but when BTC does increase this - it risks loseing the narritive - to BCH or some other scheme, as BTC has commited to 1MB.

Luke JR actually advocated 1/2 MB blocks which is why I said fine but what is your g(x)?

there must be some, and a reasonable one could solve the fee issue.