It's not just the instamine. That was just an appetizer to see if it was possible to get some constructive dialogue going with some semblance of professionalism and seriousness when it came to the explanations and answers. It's not just about the instamine; it's about everything!
Instead of raging and screaming about some giant conspiratorial "well organized scheme" let's consider the fundamentals which differentiate Litecoin from Dash.
Litecoin is much older and has a more powerful/secure ASIC PoW network than Dash.
Litecoin keeps up to date with hot new features like SEGWIT, while Dash can't even keep up with RBF/CPFP and breaks simple yet crucial things like IPv6 compatibility.
Litecoin is going to have working payment channels like Lightning soon, thanks to SEGWIT. That means InstantX, Masternodes, and Evolution are obsolete digital trash.
Litecoin's creator has DNA from MIT & Google, while Dash's has a sketchy background in finance and a 2 year mail-order degree in web marketing from University of Phoenix.
Litecoin's cobblee does not shill for and pump LTC; Dash's Duffield frequently advertises his project as a legitimate investment without disclosing the risks involved.
Litecoin was not 20% Instamined in the first 2 days; Dash was. Litecoin never cut total emission to further enrich early miners; Dash did.
Litecoin does not require trusted 3rd party security holes; Dash makes SlaveNode users the playthings of Masternode Ponzi participants.
Litecoin doesn't have to keep changing its name like a disgraced over-diluted pink sheet stock; Dash does.
Litecoin is supported by Coinbase and Kraken; Dash is considered a scam and despised by most of the crypto community, and thus will never trade on those exchanges.
Litecoin prioritizes technology over marketing; Dash does the opposite.
Litecoin has a bus factor >>1. Dash keeps losing devs who get wise to Evan 'The Instaminer' Scamfield's long con:
Come on. Give it a shot and start showing with facts just what there is in this litany that is incorrect.