In the cryptocurrency ecosystem, the Ethereum blockchain has established itself as a benchmark for popular developments and protocols. However, this situation could well be undermined from within, given the Ethereum Foundation’s disastrous management of its developers.
Ethereum Foundation vs. developers
Since its launch, the Ethereum blockchain has presented itself as the Money Lego platform on which all crypto experiments can be built and tested in real time. This vision, based on principles of inclusion and decentralization, motivates developers to participate in its constant evolution, but to what extent?
Because anger seems to be brewing beneath this seemingly ideal facade, particularly with regard to the management imposed by the Ethereum Foundation.
It must be said that this structure has come a long way, with recurring internal tensions that reached their peak last January over a vision considered to be completely out of step with the expectations of its ecosystem. Criticism has clearly been reignited following the recent departure of one of its leading researchers to the Tempo blockchain, supported by payment giant Stripe.
This brain drain to the competition seems to have loosened some tongues about what Péter Szilágyi already described as “unease” in a letter written to his managers a year and a half ago, which was shared a few days ago on the X network.
Even though we are the oldest team in the entire ecosystem (apart from Vitalik himself, of course), I don’t really feel any gratitude for having stayed so long. And the sentiment coming out of Twitter sums up this impression very well: “Thank you for building an empire for us, now step aside and let those who can make us money take the reins.”
Péter Szilágyi
“A real disaster for quite some time”
A post by Péter Szilágyi following what he identifies as “his news feed being flooded with existential crises surrounding Ethereum.” Indeed, many former developers of this blockchain are taking to the X network to express their disappointment with its internal management.
Among these critics is Polygon (POL) CEO Sandeep Nailwal, who is clearly “questioning [his] loyalty” to a blockchain that he had previously considered to be an ideal developed by Vitalik Buterin. It is now a “real disaster” for the community.
This allegiance may be “costing him billions of dollars in Polygon’s valuation” due to his attachment to Ethereum, instead of deploying as a standalone layer 1. This is to quickly forget that he is facing a revolt from POL token holders, given his performance, which is considered disastrous.
For his part, leading decentralized finance (DeFi) developer Andre Cronje adds to the criticism by pointing out the Ethereum Foundation’s lack of consideration for his participation in this ecosystem. This is an opportunity to tout the many advantages of his latest project, Sonic (S), which is presented as much more welcoming.
The possible community bankruptcy of Ethereum will not make everyone unhappy!
