Ethereum

the EF would not be able to "save" ethereum even if they tried

ethereum is decentralized - it's up to you and me to build cool shit that normal people can and want to use

crying to the EF is effectively crying "can devs do something". we're past that. grow up.

(agree, but devil advocating: )

i don't blame people who (even knowingly) don't differentiate between eth and ef. it's pretty common today to equate the product to the company. and even though it's an obvious (from my perspective) error, i can't say it's completely unforced.

so i'm wondering if eth would be better off without ef, or at least with a foundation that would have a more sensibly chosen name.

(if i saw a company named "bitcoin foundation" i'd immediately think it's a grift)

fortune cookie casts, memes, parenting, building frames, /framedl, /framedl-pro & /calmer

/ethereum foundation | opinions are my own but more than likely they come from Vitalik's blog paragraph.xyz/@chaskin

i think both can be true at the same time. i don't know what's going on inside the ef, but you'll find toxic people — be it for stupidity, malevolence or power games — everywhere. 

then it's about how easy it is to find fuel for the fire (it's really easy now given the price action).

anyway, i didn't want to leave the impression that i thought ef was useless, just dumping my (layman's) observation.

I would agree with that if it was newer people complaining, but the people who have been toxic 24/7 about the ef on x have been around for >5 years

totally agree. if i'm not mistaken the ethereum foundation has actively tried to limit its influence over time as well

there's definitely an argument to be made that ethereum would be better off without the EF today, but i don't think it would have gotten to where it is today without the EF