should BSV miners raise the transaction fees to be more pro…

I think this is an interesting question, as it impacts services, decreasing the value of the ecosystem as a whole.

The ideal solution is to have more volume, which would naturally solve this by bankrupting such behavior since other miners would become more profitable, but the ratio of fees to subsidy is still too small.

Volume is incentivized by having low fees but also a reliable network and ecosystem, so there is probably an equilibrium to find.

Another solution would be for miners to orphan empty blocks especially with such a repeated behavior, but that would impact the hashrate, and some would say that it would also impact the decentralization of mining.

Do you think we could see a market equilibrium where a miner would get paid more fees not only to include transactions themselves into blocks, but also to risk orphaning empty blocks ?

This is the right mindset. But I wonder if they could also increase orphans of empty blocks by communicating with each other to enforce some rules like "if more than 5 empty blocks we orphan the next one"? it might work in such an early stage with few miners, even if such agreements will not work once the network is more mature due to harsher competition
https://twitter.com/DanielKrawisz/status/1580980200954769408

that's a very interesting take. The empty-block miner actually has a higher fee at 548sat/b, maybe he is signalling something. Next halving is going to be fascinating
https://twitter.com/1rootSV/status/1581001419544412161

GorillaPool just decided to take the lead at raising the minimum fee, let's see how it goes
https://twetch.com/t/53eade30cda39e1920a4c54c9c94a7abcc93ec1b27a16485f9854de2ba877350