We differ, I think, in that you believe the essence of "you" is a super-physical (if not super-natural) decision making entity

I don't think I've suggested any noumenal/supernatural/dualist self here. What I've claimed is that our decisions come from our conscious awareness of ourselves and a moral attitude to improve how we act in the future. In that sense free will is equivalent to being morally responsible, you couldn't be acting freely and not be responsible for what actions you take. So in that sense I disagree that one is a pre-requisite.

It is consciousness that makes the construction of the complex, but wholly physical, algorithms of decision-making possible.

My view is completely in line with this.

My issue with the first essay was that you seemed to be looking for a 'deeper' free will, not finding one, and then throwing out the entire concept. I don't think you can avoid morality if you look at free will just because that the primary use of free will in language. Aside from Philosophy, free will is "Were they morally responsible for that action?" - look at legal battles of manslaughter and murder, intent and diminished responsibility.

I'll go have a look at the morality one, thanks for the reply! I always enjoy it when someone posts a big topic like this, I feel like I should write something when I get some spare time and let someone else lay into it for a change.