Orderflow generators should receive a disproportionate amount of fees it generates for itself.

I think this is a table stakes fact.

Thus if you’re an L2 creating a vibrant ecosystem that generates an ample amount of demand for block space. That L2 should capture the largest share of fees on that block space.

This is exactly why I struggle to understand any view points that state the L1 validators should receive a greater return. L1 validators are providing the bare minimum, which is capital, hardware & electricity. Although in those cases the bar is quite low (aside from 32 eth but Lido et al have set the bar LOW).

Validators are not bringing new users, they aren’t on-boarding @Shopify or @DoorDash Block space overtime is a commodity and it’s all the ecosystem efforts that will drive the demand, that’s where the fees should be disproportionately paid.

Idealistically, that should be redistributed or reinvested back into the apps bringing the users to the chain itself. Although the apps themselves should be generating fees one way or another.

—-

The argument that we are in this because of the L2 roadmap didn’t prioritize scaling the L1 is also a farce.

I have yet to see any viable path for an L1 to scale from a decentralized POV to any reasonable means. Maybe ZK paths forward can solve for that, but Ethereum itself is a general compute layer and will forever have the tradeoffs. General compute must scale horizontally and we’ve been seeing this for years when sidechains were what we call L2s back in 2017/2018.

Chains such as GTE, Solana etc.. have proven you can scale ridiculously but to a limit. You fully tradeoff decentralization. You also tightly align with a set of use cass (such as DeFi). Finally you simply cannot index fast enough (today) which forces co-location, and recreates flashboys.

I believe Ethereum is doing it right based on its goals.

I believe it needs to scale the L1 a lot more.

I believe it’s here to last