CM #3, Au contraire; Judd addresses a fundamental aspect.
The underlying question is not in the choice of level of automatic braking according to personal preference, but the self questioning and knowledge about automatic systems, and associated skills. Why do we believe that we require this automation.
A simple view is that we don’t; thence it is necessary to consider reasoned arguments for and against such a system, and it’s use.
Questioning and reflection should help us focuses on the underlying, covert assumptions within most automation. What does autobrake assume, what does the pilot know about the operation of the system, purpose, what are the benefits and balances with the continuing need for safe operation.
Given the abysmal overrun safety statistics, such questioning is both justified and necessary.
For the question #1; I don’t know how or why Boeing chooses specific values; but based on other programmes, the deceleration level is a balance between stopping safely and the cost of brake / tyre wear. The stopping distances may well be influenced by operators with large fleets - money talks, so the landing distances - deceleration are tuned for a particular route structure. Other operators suffer the irritation of ‘inappropriate optimisation’. Would your management pay for your wish-list?
As for the choice of deceleration level; there is no particular one which is ‘nice-to-have’, only that which matches the conditions to provide the required level of safety. That requires some thinking, not automation.
The great ‘automation bias’, perhaps for SOPs as well, is in the associated mantras can influence situation assessment. In the extreme pilots are tempted (subconsciously) to chose an aspect of automation (operational procedure) and match the real world situation to that choice. Habit, bad habit.