Tensions Rise Within the Ethereum Foundation
A storm has been brewing inside the Ethereum ecosystem after veteran developer Péter Szilágyi, lead of the Geth (Go Ethereum) project, publicly criticized the Ethereum Foundation’s governance structure. In a mid-2024 memo shared with Foundation leadership, Szilágyi alleged that Ethereum’s decision-making is dominated by a “ruling elite who will never relinquish control.”
According to Szilágyi, Ethereum may appear decentralized, but Vitalik Buterin—its co-founder and public face—has “complete indirect control” over the network’s direction. The Ethereum Foundation (EF), a non-profit organization that supports the Ethereum ecosystem, has yet to respond to the claims.
Claims of Centralized Influence
Szilágyi, who joined the Foundation in 2015 and helped build Ethereum’s most popular software client, argued that Buterin’s influence shapes nearly every major development within the network.
“His attention, research direction, donations, and investments absolutely define which projects succeed,” Szilágyi wrote. “His opinions set the boundaries of what’s acceptable in the ecosystem, so the key to gray-area behavior is to convince Vitalik it’s ok-ish.”
He further claimed that project approvals and funding often depend on the support of a small circle of 5–10 people close to Buterin. This group, Szilágyi said, also dominates new investment and advisory roles, leading to repeated collaborations among the same insiders and external venture capital firms.
Concerns Over Ethereum Foundation Governance
The developer alleged that the Ethereum Foundation has shifted from its early open-investment approach to a more exclusive, centralized strategy, favoring established insiders over new entrants. “You find the same exact people behind all the new projects launching,” Szilágyi stated. “Each project plays into each other’s hands, and if you zoom out, you find the same VCs involved.”
These remarks have reignited debates about Ethereum’s decentralization, governance transparency, and whether the network’s leadership aligns with its founding principles of open participation.
Polygon CEO Joins the Discussion
The controversy drew responses from key figures across the blockchain space, including Sandeep Nailwal, CEO and founder of Polygon, an Ethereum Layer-2 network. Quoting Szilágyi’s comments on X (formerly Twitter), Nailwal echoed similar frustrations about Ethereum’s leadership and internal dynamics.
“Why does it feel like every other week someone with major contributions to Ethereum has to publicly question what they’re even doing here?” Nailwal asked, adding that the Ethereum community needs to take a hard look at itself.
Nailwal also criticized the Foundation for refusing to recognize Polygon as an official Layer-2 solution, which would grant it additional security guarantees. In response, Vitalik Buterin acknowledged Polygon’s contributions, calling its role “immensely valuable” to the broader Ethereum ecosystem.
A Growing Debate Over Decentralization
The exchange has sparked renewed discussion about Ethereum’s true level of decentralization and whether influence has become too concentrated among a small group of decision-makers. While Vitalik Buterin remains a respected figure in the crypto world, Szilágyi’s claims highlight an ongoing tension between ideals of decentralization and the realities of leadership influence in one of blockchain’s most important projects.
As the debate continues, the community watches closely to see how the Ethereum Foundation responds—and whether calls for governance reform will lead to tangible change.
