user-1: If the goal of the lightning network is to route payments as cheap as possible (i know this is an assumption and maybe not everyone agrees), why wouldn't it be a good idea to just drop the percentage fee? A fee in general is necessary to prevent spamming, that is why no fee wouldn't work. Is that assumption correct?

Is that assumption correct?

Rene points out, that fees are not preventing spammers from spamming the network.
That leaves the question: Why not drop the percentage and keep the base fee?

user63872: The lightning network is still young, so I don't think there is an absolute consensus amongst users on what the optimal fee policy is. That said, one consideration could be:
When deciding your lightning node's fee policy, one consideration is simply liquidity allocation. Generally speaking, channels that are well balanced will be more useful than channels that are unbalanced (ie, all of the funds sitting on one side). Routing a payment means pushing the channel balance around, so if someone pushes payments that unbalance your channel(s), you may want some compensation, to help cover any potential costs of rebalancing your channel.

-1: <p>If the goal of the lightning network is to route payments as cheap as possible <em>(i know this is an assumption and maybe not everyone agrees)</em>, why wouldn't it be a good idea to just drop the percentage fee? A fee in general is necessary to prevent spamming, that is why no fee wouldn't work. Is that assumption correct?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is that assumption correct?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Rene points out, that fees are not preventing spammers from spamming the network.</p>
<p>That leaves the question: Why not <strong>drop the percentage</strong> and <strong>keep the base</strong> fee?</p>
 63872: <p>The lightning network is still young, so I don't think there is an absolute consensus amongst users on what the optimal fee policy is. That said, one consideration could be:</p>
<p>When deciding your lightning node's fee policy, one consideration is simply liquidity allocation. Generally speaking, channels that are well balanced will be more useful than channels that are unbalanced (ie, all of the funds sitting on one side). Routing a payment means pushing the channel balance around, so if someone pushes payments that unbalance your channel(s), you may want some compensation, to help cover any potential costs of rebalancing your channel.</p>
