Is it objectively worse than any other altcoin?  I don't know. If it died tomorrow, would the space be better with BNB or whatever as the "next Bitcoin"?  Maybe it's actually good for hard money and the development of sufficient network effects for Bitcoin because it's a honeypot for all the bad ideas. Saylor says there's "no second best" but that's just hyperbole. If there was a coin/network, not as flawed as Eth, that was 90% as "good" as Bitcoin, say, it would be less of a shitcoin than Eth, sure, but would probably set back the movement for money separate from government, primarily by lessening or delaying network effects.  Maybe bitcoiners should be happy letting ETH play the Washington Generals here.