Mini thread on $AMPL vs $BASED distribution schemes.

$AMPL raised money in private sales where they sold around 22% of the original supply.

$BASED did not, instead distributing all tokens in a flash farm in August which last only a few weeks.

1/x Ampleforth has set aside more % of the network than was allocated to VCs for long-term liquidity mining programs.

BASED participation was limited to a few agile farmers and degens who could quickly participate in a limited time window.

2/x Whales had a disproportionate advantage farming BASED. Yes, I understand they limited address allocations or whatever, but whales can use multiple addresses.

3/x BASED now has less than 3,000 address holders. The entire supply is centralized into less than 3,000 addresses.

AMPL has almost 20,000 holders, is listed on multiple exchanges (more holders), and has continued 10-year token distribution.

4/x Which scheme is more fair?

To be clear: I like BASED distribution scheme, I like fair distribution scheme, and I dislike VCs and arbitrary restrictions for private investors.

5/x In ideal world AMPL might have had a more "fair" non-VC funding scheme, but they also raised money in a bear market before farming existed.

They raised a modest amount, and raised more $ from the IEO than from private investors.

6/x The anti-VC FUD people are really just angry because they think VCs dumped and crashed the party in July.

In reality, nothing goes up in a straight line and the success of elastic currencies like $AMPL will depend on long-term innovation and utility, not original funding.

7/x $BASED meme brand is sick.