Hi franky1 - I always enjoy reading your posts, they're insightful and pose the hard questions that need to be asked (sadly I can't merit you as the DT merit font trolls are on strike at the moment Which in itself means they're not doing the job they signed up to do)
I've got a comment about my own observations concerning the Lightning Network. On the block-chain, I think small value transactions with small TX fees paid are going to be sooner rather than later a thing of the past as people will either shift to another, cheaper altcoin with negligible fees, or those altcoin TX will be non-existent fees.
While I like the LN and the ease of use it promises, it's klunky at the coal face end. (It might be good for the coders at the back-end who want to sit and watch every electron that flicker's across their computer screen, but it has a long way to go before the masses adopt it) I've lost bitcoins via Eclair and Zap and I'm in TX limbo attempting to shift funds from one Zap wallet to a new one since the 6th of March. (Which means I'm a glutton for punishment)
So, like other people who are buried under an ever growing list of TX that get queued ahead of their own, I was wondering (in a thought bubble kind of way) if you can explain how you would speed up transactions on the block-chain (of any price range) without having to go into a bidding war - surely a level playing field where first in, first served (and all users paying the same fare to ride the TX bus) would be a more appropriate way for the transactions to be processed?
That said:
Did you know that LN transactions look for the CHEAPEST path to the end user? Perhaps that's why DaveF's path is seen as golden and is now well trodden - have you considered that? (either of you?)