1. Rarely makes transaction doesn't mean you only HODL, someone might buy goods (such as gift cards) on special occasion (such as birthday and national holiday).
I believe LN can decongest the base layer, and make fees cheap enough for all kinds of users.
I believe otherwise, even LN whitepaper (
http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf) on chapter 10 think,
1. On global scale scenario, 1MB block size definitely not enoug.
2. On scenario to support 35 million users, it uses very optimistic scenario where all users use LN and only make 3 on-chain transaction/year. In fact, most LN channel duration is only 2 weeks and not everyone will use LN.
2. It's not about good UI/UX, but fee to make 2 on-chain transaction which already mentioned by @Heisenberg_Hunter.
With the help of exchanges, and working together with Bitcoin custodial wallets, isn’t it possible for users to have their LN wallets sent with coins/incoming capacity opened to them?
I admit, I don’t have all the answers, I offer only what’s in my stupid brain.
My point is
someone has to pay the fee for 2 on-chain transaction which used to open and close the channel.
One of the main Principles of Bitcoin is, “no censorship”. If a node censors transactions, what’s stopping me, and calling for the other full nodes, to stop listening to it for misbehaving?
By "a node censor transaction", how would node do it? I doubt refusing to broadcast or accept specific transaction categorized as misbehavior (CMIIW).