The new meme has been memed, why are players angry this time?

The day before yesterday, Binance launched the "Rebirth Support" plan and distributed the first batch of "Rebirth Support" airdrops yesterday, undoubtedly giving meme players on BSC another good topic to discuss.

However, a "forking" event sparked controversy among players.

The first "Rebirth" coin that gathered players' consensus and launched, had a contract address ending in "4444." As seen from the following candlestick chart, after a successful launch, the "Rebirth" coin with a contract ending in "4444" began to rise, reaching a peak market cap that once exceeded $15 million.

Approximately 8 hours later, another "Rebirth" coin, with a contract address starting with "4444," also successfully launched and quickly rose in the next 2 hours, reaching a peak market cap that once exceeded $12 million.

During the rapid rise of the new "Rebirth" coin, the OG "Rebirth" coin suffered a heavy blow, dropping by more than 50% at one point. At this time, a tweet from KOL Li Ping supporting the new "Rebirth" coin made him the target of players' criticism:

Soon after, another prominent supporter of the OG "Rebirth" coin, KOL Chenpepe, criticized this "forking" behavior:

Previously, "forking" situations have occurred in the crypto world, such as the cases of lowercase and uppercase Neiro, CZ's dog "Broccoli," and so on. However, this time, looking back at yesterday's scenario, Binance was still at the center of public opinion under a massive player "siege," and the BSC meme market was not as hot as before. Furthermore, the OG "Rebirth" coin had already reached a peak market cap of $15 million based on its spontaneous consensus. In this context, the sudden surge of the new "Rebirth" coin, accompanied by KOL endorsements, made it difficult for players supporting the OG "Rebirth" coin to believe that the new coin's uptrend was a result of a spontaneous consensus migration, rather than a conspiracy.

If these two coins had launched successfully at the same time and migrated to external trading to compete, players would not have such strong emotions. In the eyes of many players, if a highly influential KOL has a positive outlook on a topic and, in a situation where their financial capacity alone surpasses that of many ordinary players, joins in to develop the market cap further, what's the harm? Even if initially both coins had identical themes and tickers, competing on the same starting line would still be relatively fair.

Last night, the founder of gmgn.ai, @haze0x, also expressed his opinion, stating that the act of "forking" should be opposed:

The controversial KOL Li Ping responded this morning, stating that he initially bought both coins but later shifted his support to the new "rebirth" coin, once again expressing support for the new "rebirth" coin:

Currently, the market capitalization of the new "rebirth" coin and the OG "rebirth" coin is both around $3.7 million, putting them back on the same starting line.

With CZ's tweet supporting Chinese tickers and the news of Binance possibly testing Chinese ticker contracts, Chinese ticker tokens in the BSC meme market have started to heat up. The turmoil between "rebirth" coins is unlikely to be resolved quickly but is expected to continue with the potential arrival of the second wave of Chinese market trends.