Vitalik 发文：以太坊基金会将缩小规模、减少 ETH 销售

On May 24th, Vita Bhuterin posted roughly 1,500 words to X that read less like a vision statement and more like a confession. The Ethereum Foundation is shrinking. ETH sales are being cut. His own influence over the board is, in his words, going to continue to Wayne. And all of this arrived exactly 3 days after a former senior EF researcher published a rival proposal calling for a $1 billion organization to do the job the Ethereum Foundation apparently no longer can.

So today I'm going to walk you through exactly what Vitilik said and why he said it now. Dismantle the idea that this is a vision statement rather than damage control and lay out the structural problems that no amount of cipher punk language is going to fix for ETH holders. My name is DC and you're watching the Coin Bureau. Now, before we get into Vitalik's actual proposal, you need to understand the pressure cooker he was responding to because this post did not arrive out of nowhere.

ETH is currently trading at $2,60. That is down roughly 20% yearonear and approximately 46% below where it traded 2 years ago at $3,823. The ETH to BTDC ratio has collapsed to 0027, a 10-month low. Spot ETH ETFs have just printed 10 consecutive days of net outflows. Cumulative ETH ETF outflows in 2026 alone have crossed $2.4 billion. Harvard management company fully liquidated its $86.8 million Ethereum ETF position in Q1, and the leadership picture inside the foundation has been frankly a slow motion crisis.

In February, co-executive director Tom Marsh Stunchuk stepped down less than a year into the role. In April, operations lead Josh Start resigned. Then in May alone, five senior contributors walked out of the door, including Barnab Mono, Tim Bo, and Trent FPS. The onchain analyst Bantech summed it up in one post. All three EF protocol leads gone. Which brings us directly to the post itself because the timing tells you everything you need to know about the motive.

So what did Vitalik actually say? The headline is what he calls the smaller ship framework. In other words, the Ethereum Foundation is going to be smaller. It is going to focus only on what he claims it can uniquely do. And he wrapped that focus in a five-letter mandate called crops, which stands for censorship resistance, capture resistance, openness, privacy, and security. He explicitly said that competing with rival chains on throughput and TPS is quote a route to mediocrity.

So the Ethereum Foundation is now stepping out of the speed war entirely. On the Treasury question, he committed to selling less ETH, framing it as longevity over breadth. He pointed out that EF holds roughly 0.16% of total ETH supply compared to other blockchain foundations sitting between 10 and 50%. Vitalik disclosed that approximately 90% of his own net worth is held in ETH. He also confirmed the board is expanding and that his personal power inside it will, in his words, and I quote, continue to decrease, which is honestly what I want.

And he framed Ethereum's future role as part of an ecosystem of sanctuary technologies optimized for robustness against governmental and regulatory pressure. To put it simply, the Ethereum Foundation is no longer the center. It is, to use his exact phrasing, one node with a defined purpose alongside other nodes. Now look, on its surface, this is the most aggressive philosophical reset the foundation has ever published.

Smaller treasury sales, less central control, cipher punk values reaffirmed a clear mandate, a humbler CEO. If you read it cold with no context, you would call it leadership. But context is exactly what this post does not survive. Which brings us to the contrarian read. Because every single reform pillar in this announcement maps with surgical precision onto a specific public criticism the foundation has received over the past 18 months.

Critics accuse the EF of dumping ETH on its own holders. Vitilix responds, "We'll sell less ETH, and by the way, we only hold.16%." Critics accuse the EF of behaving like a central authority over a supposedly decentralized network. Vitilik's response, we are one node, not the center. Critics including Laura Shin said Vitilik's rhetoric about decentralization never matched the EF's actual behavior. Vitilik's response the crops mandate now formally align operations with cipher punk values.

Critics most notably Duncan Feist argued the EF is economically misaligned with ETH holders. Bitilik's response 90% of my net worth is an ETH and my board power is decreasing. Critics said the EF was chasing a doomed throughput race with Solana. Vitilik's response, chasing TPS is a route to mediocrity. Critics pointed at the brain drain as evidence of internal crisis. Vitilik's response, a smaller, leaner foundation is the plan.

Now, you might assume this is just what good leadership looks like. Responsive, reflective, willing to evolve. However, that assumption ignores the timing. Right? If you're looking to trade these latest market moves, whether that's crypto or traditional assets like gold and commodities, then BitGet is definitely worth a look. They've just rolled out their Trady trading platform, which lets you trade assets like gold and other commodities directly using USDT, so you don't need to jump between platforms.

You also get deep liquidity, low slippage, and access to up to 500x leverage. Now, if you sign up using the QR code on screen or the link in the description, you can get up to $50,000 in bonuses. And on top of that, if you complete your first net deposit of $5,000 and place your first trade, you'll unlock a VIP3 trial. Now, that includes up to 38% fee discounts, exclusive VIP perks, and free token airdrops. So, scan the QR code, check the link below, and see what BitGet has to offer.

This post landed 3 days after Dankrat Feist, a former senior EF researcher who has since left for a competing chain called Temple, published a proposal for a separate $1 billion organization explicitly designed to do what the EF allegedly will not, which is advocate for ETH, the asset, and drive price appreciation. The honest read is this. When every reform you announce can be traced back to a specific complaint someone louder than you made first, you're not leading the conversation.

You are answering it. And there is a meaningful difference between a vision and an audit response. Even when both produce the same paperwork, right? Which brings us directly to the structural problem nobody at the foundation seems prepared to address. Governance reform fixes governance. It does not fix tokconomics. And the criticisms that have been crushing ETH for the past two years are not really about who sits on the fboard.

They are about where the money actually goes. So let's talk about that. In March 2024, the Denan upgrade introduced blob transactions for layer 2 data. And the intent was reasonable. Make L2s cheaper, drive adoption, scale Ethereum without compromising the base layer. But the consequence of that has been brutal. L2 data posting costs collapsed by 80 to 90%. L2 activity became economically decoupled from base layer demand and the burn mechanism that powered the entire ultrasound money thesis collapsed with it.

Daily burn rates fell from over 2,000 ETH in late 2023 to roughly 300 to 400 ETH by early 2025. Today, ETH is structurally inflationary, approximately 45,000 new ETH per month. Yes, you heard that right. The asset that was sold to a generation of holders as ultrasound money is now adding supply every single month with no clear path to deflation. And even worse, the value being generated on top of Ethereum is not flowing back to ETH holders.

It is being captured by the layer 2 operators themselves. Coinbase is based offchain labs arbitum ops optimism. These are for-profit entities and they have no protocol level obligation to share sequencer revenue with the base layer. Some analysts have estimated that base and similar layer 2s have redirected significant fee revenue away from Ethereum main

原文超出正文长度上限，此处截断——上游还有内容，完整版见上方「原文 ↗」。