Maybe I missed the discussion on this but it feels like one underrated benefit of ET is that you’re probably reducing the number of individual parties that can cause a liveness fault (from proposer & bb to only bb)

(Those who believe ET will still be filled by sth like the PBS market on Ethereum will disagree)

Yep strong assumption that ticket holders will be the same entities as builders...

Otherwise do you mean liveness fault = missing payload? Now you can have consensus liveness without execution liveness :)

Robust Incentives Group @ Ethereum Foundation

https://rig.ethereum.org

Yes I meant missing payload

thinking is that the ticket holder will most likely not end up in a market structure in which they completely delegate block building rights but are also required in the “critical path” to building a block

Either they completely outsource or they are able to push it through alone

Both situations are possible
- on the critical path but outsource with PBS 
- sell rights for a specific slot once the ticket is drawn and get out

Vertical integration with builders is possible but less desirable. And we should try to discourage it

ethereum protocol research /ethrd + Crypto x AI /dacc 

I doubt PBS as we see it today would be a stable equilibrium

Agree on the last point

I have thoughts but seems better to write a longer form doc on this at some point