There is no actual split or viable alternative chain to choose. What happened over the weekend with BIP-110 (the "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork") was not a balanced 2017-style Blocksize War like Bitcoin vs. Bitcoin Cash. It was a marginal minority node fork that immediately stalled out due to lack of miner and economic consensus.

the last hard fork didn't last well I mean bitcoin cash, satoshi vision, bitcoin gold and other they do work and have the price but can follow the original bitcoin. Im going to choose where the majority choose and for You don't need to choose a chain or split your funds. The main Bitcoin chain (BTC) remains intact with 99.85%+ consensus, mining blocks every 10 minutes as normal. BIP-110 served as a real-time demonstration that Bitcoin governance is governed by market consensus, node sovereignty, and economic incentives not unilateral soft forks.

Oh, that's surprising, because so far, nobody wanted to buy any BIP-110 coins, even for a single non-BIP-110 satoshi. Do you want to get some of them? My BIP-110 coins already reached a single confirmation, so I can use them to split any coins properly, and move them independently on each chain. Of course, it will be up to you, to get them confirmed on BIP-110 chain properly.

If you have pre-BIP-110 coins, then you also have post-BIP-110 coins, as long as you didn't move them yet.

For these coins, you need to have non-BIP-110 coins, because he will fork from the heaviest chain.

For some reason, I doubt they are technically competent to make things tick, because previously, they rejected valid technical concerns, which led them to the stuck BIP-110 chain, because they believed, that miners will flip a bit, just because they want them to do so, and because of some magic fairy dust, they will suddenly support it.

It was proven to be ineffective, people are ready to put Ordinals, NFTs, JPEGs, and a lot of protocols in a BIP-110 compatible ways. If anything, it will be just like a "hackme site", but with blockchain instead, where a lot of programmers will treat it as a challenge, to test, how censorship can be prevented, if some other party is trying to actively block your transactions, by deploying next BIPs.

They already ignored a suggestion, that sidechains should be launched with Merged Mining. They want to convince new people, to use Merged Mining for their sidechains, built on top of e-cash, but for some reason, they don't want to launch e-cash as a Merged Mining chain, where people could mine BTC and e-cash with the same mining power. It is like saying: "Hey, developers, use that great feature, but I am not going to touch it!".

Also, if they would want to launch sidechains, which could be directly connected with BTCs, and not use Merged Mining, then they would use things like Proof of Work inside Script. In this way, attacking their network would require attacking BTC at the same time, so it would be much harder to justify. Also, in this case, their chain would use real BTCs instead.

If people would want spamless nodes, and sidechains, then they would use existing solutions, or work on improving them, without trying to fork to another chain. The fact, that they are forking, where there is no reason to do so, clearly shows their technical incompetence.

If you want to get BIP-110 coins "ASAP", then I can sign a transaction, which will move coins only on that chain, here and now. It is up to you, how do you want to get it confirmed on BIP-110 side. If you agree, you would be the first buyer, because literally nobody wants to buy these coins now.