Better than giving 71% to 11 people yes. However that is still not a very good way of distributing things.
That way just says.... getting lucky on bitcoin entitles you to get lucky on every other new alt opportunity.
NAS wasn't a scam they would never have given 20% to a single person if it was that instantly sends alarm bells off.
However you can't have coins where only 11 people are givien 71% that is just crazy.
Nxt yeah you could say was a little more fair 71 people is greater than 11.... so really even though NAS gave some scraps out for free NXT is still not such a distorted distribution.
However 71 is still crazy small although i know a lot of nxt ipo holders did sell a lot off very cheaply to start with. Not like this NAS whales demanding 800x -1200x investment to share a few out.
Can nobody clone this kind of coin and do a reasonable distribution to more than a handful of people?
The buy in period can last months/years if the coins are held by escrow level members and it is all transparent.
I don't really want to get away from the distribution point of the topic... however i do want to know why more people are not cloning nxt since the source is there now for nas?
How come we have not seen 20 nxt clones per day like scrypt so far?
Is the source code really crippled in some way like they say, if so how are these other clones releasing on code that has intentional bugs?
So anyway nxt 71 people - nah not a great idea kind of put a lot of people off, Nas the bulk given to 11 people.....whoops worse than nxt.
Which of these nxt clones can get it correct?