I'd agree if BTC wasn't such a mess.
But it's not. Segwit + Core conceded on hardfork = 3.2mb blocks in 2017. I see the glass ceiling on BTC price coming off mostly around 8-10MB blocks, so it's not far off.
But about Monero, I think I saw Peter Todd claiming the Bitpay or something or other company's idea for dynamic block size was a "broken" idea the other day. Wasn't Bitpay's idea the same thing Monero already uses? What was the difference in the two? I would find it hard to believe he would say that solely because of a missing non-zero block reward. Someone needs to question the Todd and get him to clarify these statements as they relate to Monero.
Monero's adaptive blocksize limit relies on a miner penalty that depends upon the block reward. It simply will not work in a coin without a tail emission or demurrage since once the block reward runs out there is no miner penalty. Yes this includes most Cryptonote coins starting with Bytecoin. Aeon's I understand is the exception among Cryptonote coins. My take is that the tail emission in Digitalnote is way to low for the adaptive blocksize limit to work but I have not looked at this particular case in detail. Bytecoin may because of the two year premine / ninjamine lead provide a very good case on how an adaptive blocksize limit can fail in the absence of a tail emission or demurrage. The small block group in Bitcoin do make a very good case here.
As for Bitcoin or Bitcoin like coins it will also not work. One notable exception is Dogecoin because it has a tail emission. The other alternative to a tail emission would be demurrage so one could for example add a Monero style adaptive blocksize limit to Freicoin.
