Hi all, I am a bit late to this discussion, but I do not think that this is the right way to go about doing this. This pathway prevents the utility of certain decentralized projects that are projected to hit this limit in the next few years. By applying a single transaction gas spend limit, optimizations such as accessing warmed SLOADs become harder to achieve when performing group actions.
Imagine a contract that uses 10m in gas, mostly during SLOADs. After that 10m spend, only ~6m is left for warm accessing, which is much less than the current 20m. I could be for this EIP if the warm SLOAD costs were also reduced substantially, like from 100->20 or something similar or if using EIP2930 were re-jigged to not price the user out up front and pack in risk of not using the loads (main reason why people do not use it imo)
Do we not want people to burn the native token?
Addendum:
If EIP2929 applies across a block, I could be more for this, but that still leaves a lot of risk with the executor of multiple batched transactions.