LTC is great for many reasons, but it will have higher and higher fees as well if developers don't do something about it. This combined with RBF policy could give the same bidding war that happened in Bitcoin SL "Core" (BTC) and would prohibit using zero-conf transactions. It also has SegWit, which is not always considered good by those investing for the long term. 

Starting off as a memecoin similar to Doge, it doesn't share the same transaction history and interest as the two large Bitcoin forks. Nor does it have a highly developed ecosystem and hashrate.

It does. Or rather there are independent servers running it. I suggest you search r/BTC on Reddit for the sites.

No, that's not actually a problem, or more precisely it's not a complete roadblock but a 'problem' already considered in the original design that should be mitigated over time if  scaling on chain is just seriously considered and tried. I can recommend a few resources. 

First read Satoshis own writing and the design paper in particular.  Satoshi was actually very clear on how to scale and even in the paper he released there is briefly a plan laid out on how to facilitate it.

Gavin Andresen tried re-explaining this many times before becoming isolated and eventually pushed out from the upper echelon of the developer community around the official client. At the very end he made several moves trying to decentralize development by launching competing clients, realizing that likely Satoshi had been wrong in expecting only one client to be enough for the network. You can see what he had to say [here](https://archive.is/urzdV). He has since made casual contributions in the Bitcoin Cash community.

In order to scale the blocks to very large size, technologies displayed at several of the past Bitcoin and now Bitcoin Cash conferences can be used. Even without technologies such as advanced pruning etc, this can likely be done without endangering anyone who wants to run an advanced SPV or so called "full node" - which does not actually count as a node per the design - on their computer as a hobbyist or for extra security in transactions.

[This article](https://www.yours.org/content/bitcoin-cash--memo--and-the-public-goods-fallacy-7861b7dee557) explains some of the potential hurdles to different sorts of onchain use cases and how to mitigate them even if we can implement almost inconceivably large blocks (past several terrabytes just to begin with).

I could go into much greater detail of how Bitcoin was designed to function, but please ask this question in the r/btc subreddit or to developers on r/bitcoinabc if you want a more thorough answer.

You can call it Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin BCH. It's not a big deal. People will know what you are talking about. 

But there's a point to be made here, that if the old Bitcoin recourses such as the Bitcoin.org, the old Wiki, BitcoinTalk and r/Bitcoin had not been manipulated and if the pre-scheduled scaling roadmap as per the Bitcoin design had been continued without introducing SegWit, the fork would never have taken place.

Then there was the swamping of Twitter and Youtube with automated "bcash" spam etc, but that's a different chapter.

As a user and community member, I personally don't want to see Craig Wright anywhere near it. His "contributions" so far are incredibly limited and his past and the promises made in private to publicize proof that he was Satoshi that he then didn't deliver on has negatively affected the careers of several community members.

please sir see my introducing post.

Very Wrong Ver continues to be wrong.

Best writeup on the subject -- https://hackernoon.com/thats-not-bitcoin-that-s-bcash-f730f0d0a837

Very Wrong Ver would like you to believe that his ego-project is something else. He neglects to mention that there's currently a large class-action lawsuit being aimed at him over his underhanded and deceptive practices.

Lightning Network has reduced fee payments to one satoshi -- 0.00000001 and a corresponding satoshi fee as well. 

BCash hasn't had any traction, as shown by the graphs here -- http://fork.lol/tx/txs

Very Wrong Ver has gotten desperate, so now they're claiming to "burn" coins they earn in fees. Problem is, even at 12%, this number will be vanishingly small -- almost a rounding error off the remaining coins left to be mined.

There's also no proof that the coins they are sending to this "burn" address is unrecoverable, which renders the whole exercise moot to begin with.

Very Wrong Ver is going down with the ship, but you have a choice -- getting into the lifeboats instead of waiting for the "CEO" to turn this around.

I honestly think you should reconsider @transisto. Bitcoin Cash is being sorely underestimated when it comes to the fundamentals.

You can find good counterpoints to every single of your contentions on r/btc and other resources. Don't mind the trolls there. Just communicate with people and be cordial and you'll get your answers.

I've recently used BCH for a transaction - it took about 50 minutes until the block confirmation came in and I was able to use BCH.

I know - the block time normally swings between a few minutes and half an hour - but having a waiting time of nearly 1 hour - is miles away from being a better Bitcoin.

I appreciate your commitment.
best of luck my dear friend.