Great write-up! I really like the concept of splitting the validator role into smaller, specialized components. This approach could enable more focused improvements across different areas.
The idea of includers is a cool one, but I think we should explore compensating them through issuance rather than requiring potentially censored parties to pay higher fees for inclusion.
From the user’s perspective, the inclusion fee seems a bit odd. For example, as a user willing to spend x on my transaction, I have two options:
- Pay x via the priority fee (no inclusion fee).
- Pay x via the inclusion fee (no priority fee).
As a result, I can choose who to compensate for inclusion: the includer or the proposer. Currently, the proposer receives the payment, which makes sense as they secure the network and arguably deserve it.