Two speakers debate whether token transparency is reactive or proactive. Speaker B says both happen, but warns that visibility into token distribution can scare holders when they see patterns that were previously hidden.
So this is great. Is it more of a reactive thing like, hey, we think we've got a problem, or is it more of a proactive thing like, hey, I want this data ongoing for a long time? Oh man, that's such a good question because it works in both ways because tokens want to prove how transparent they are.
If they have a distribution which is healthy and it supports growth, you know, there's no large transfers or anything like that, then it's amazing. So tokens like that, but also, you know, tokens are afraid and scared because suddenly they can see their distribution in a way they couldn't before.