Two things on launchpads are completely unavoidable: First, front-running sniping. Second, dilution. By “unavoidable,” I mean: you can implement all sorts of mechanisms to superficially prevent them—like Virtuals’ dynamic opening tax or traffic throttling—but in the end, these only create new problems, and when you add it all up, you realize it’s worse than the original situation: not worth the cost. Dilution is nothing new; everyone has tried many approaches, including “unique name per ticker” models like ordinals. Last year, Four tried exactly that—and got instantly roasted: it led to coin-launching groups to shotgun-squat on tickers, leaving legitimate CTOs with no chance. BNB is too fast, too cheap. So this measure might work on BTC because of its high sunk cost—but it fails on BNB. In reality, the dilution FUD, if viewed from a whale’s perspective as a strategy, is simply about determining: “Given my current capital, what’s the highest FDV I can reach without incurring losses?” It’s possible to go higher, but based on the whale’s data and scripted strategy, this is the point to take profits and dilute. We’ve tracked numerous coin-launch clusters on RH and BSC—they generate very low revenue per round and rely entirely on low margins and high volume. So, at its core, the dilution dilemma is unsolvable. The only real solution is allowing meme coins to be shorted. Once shorting is possible, dilution becomes irrelevant. There’s one way for the dragons, another for dilution—treat them all as lotteries, where both long and short can play.