Storm in Ethereum: Developer Accuses Buterin, Polygon Calls It a ‘Miserable Show’

The Ethereum community is facing one of its most turbulent weeks in recent memory. Core developer Péter Szilágyi has publicly accused founder Vitalik Buterin and his close circle of exercising excessive influence over decision-making within the Ethereum Foundation. The controversy deepened when Polygon CEO Sandeep Nailwal described the ETH community as a “miserable show.” Meanwhile, Vitalik Buterin is attempting to calm the storm — though his latest post on X appears more like damage control than genuine reconciliation.

Core Developer: “Ethereum Is Run by a Few People” Péter Szilágyi, one of the key developers of Ethereum Core, published a letter addressed to the Ethereum Foundation, accusing Buterin and his inner circle of maintaining tight control over major decisions. According to Szilágyi, the fate of most ETH-related projects is effectively decided by just 5–10 key individuals and 1–3 venture capital firms. “Ethereum has become a special-interest group centered around Vitalik,” he wrote. He further argued that success in the ecosystem no longer depends on merit or technical achievement, but on proximity to Buterin’s core circle. The revelation has reignited debate over governance, transparency, and decentralization — the very principles Ethereum was built upon.

Polygon CEO: “The ETH Community Is a Miserable Show” Following Szilágyi’s post, Polygon CEO Sandeep Nailwal voiced his frustration with the ETH community, even questioning his own loyalty to the network. “Ethereum has become a place where even major contributors are starting to wonder if it’s worth staying,” Nailwal said. He claimed that Polygon, despite being a crucial Layer-2 solution for Ethereum, has received little to no support from the Ethereum Foundation or its core developers.

He blamed this on the “social dynamics and socialist behavior” of the ETH ecosystem, which he believes sidelines projects that don’t fit the dominant narrative. Nailwal also criticized the fact that Polygon PoS isn’t officially recognized as part of Ethereum’s Layer-2 ecosystem, even though projects built on Polygon, like Polymarket, are celebrated as Ethereum success stories. He went on to claim that Polygon’s valuation could be 2–5× higher if it branded itself as a standalone Layer-1 blockchain rather than as part of Ethereum. “I’ll make one last push to restore the Layer-2 narrative,” he added.

Vitalik Buterin Attempts to Ease Tensions In response to the controversy, Buterin took to X to praise Polygon and express appreciation for Sandeep Nailwal’s contributions and philanthropy. He highlighted that Nailwal had returned $190 million in SHIB proceeds from Buterin’s earlier donation, which were later used to fund Balvi, an open-source biotech initiative focused on airborne disease research. Buterin also acknowledged Polygon’s early efforts in developing ZK technology, noting that verification costs for ZK proofs have now fallen to just $0.0001 per transaction.

He hinted that Polygon could soon roll out a fully operational ZK-PoS chain with full Ethereum Layer-1 security guarantees.

A Divided Community: Decentralization vs. Central Control The debate among Szilágyi, Nailwal, and Buterin has split the Ethereum community into two camps: Those who argue that Buterin’s leadership is essential for Ethereum’s stability and vision.And those who warn that too much centralization undermines the very spirit of the network. While Buterin calls for unity, more voices are demanding greater transparency and leadership rotation.

Ethereum now stands at a crossroads:

it can either reinforce openness and community autonomy,

or remain, as Szilágyi puts it, “a project run by a chosen few.”

#Ethereum , #VitalikButerin , #Polygon , #decentralization , #CryptoNews

Stay one step ahead – follow our profile and stay informed about everything important in the world of cryptocurrencies! Notice: ,The information and views presented in this article are intended solely for educational purposes and should not be taken as investment advice in any situation. The content of these pages should not be regarded as financial, investment, or any other form of advice. We caution that investing in cryptocurrencies can be risky and may lead to financial losses.“