Maybe a little off topic, but regarding “why is the force-inclusion delay 24 hours anyway?”:
What sort of batch information gets posted to the L1?
In a based roll-up for example, all of the L2 transaction information is posted to the L1, so the forced-inclusion path is in the order of the finality of the L1. It feels like we should be able to extend the semantics of the L2 batch to include specific transaction information, such as transactions in the force inclusion queue. Would this be realistic?
We could place the additional burden of “bigger batches” as a result of this 1-to-1 mapping from the forced inclusion queue on the users entering the forced inclusion queue. If that is seen as too high a barrier, we could introduce a fast and slow force-inclusion queue: fast performing as I mentioned, requiring more information per-batch, and slow acting as is currently the case.