Agreed. 
I would go with “best” user experience and Network sustainability overall, where ever that leads.
- Computational cost for granular accounting is also my concern. I mentioned previously… when we switch to decimal, this would not be a problem. Until TestNet3, we won’t know definitively. Would be nice to test a “copper” version of Safecoin (1/1000) and see if charging per MB bogs down the Network.
I was thinking about making the copper Safecoin version a “decimal type” from the start. It’s already so tiny in fiat value and not really worth stealing. Could be a clever way to test decimal security along side the more valuable Safecoin. In fact, when a user allocates Safecoin to their PUT reserve, they convert it to decimal. That’s brilliant!
- Yes, users ultimately decide what they want. I think people are already familiar with a consumption model. All we have to do is explain it the same way they consume gas for their cars. Or how people pay for minutes used on their phones. I think people can relate to this very easily, even non-techs. And the market for SAFE will be much more than just “cloud storage” consumers. A Different Perspective made it pretty clear the next generation want a Social Network.
I like your suggestions for transparency in UX and it would help a lot!
As for your last point, price spikes could hurt people, the same way gas prices hurt the world globally. At the same time, it also calls new farmers to “action” and helps stabilize the Network. So it works both ways.