Ethereum is not succumbing to maximalism

There has been a lot of talk lately about how our community interacts with other projects in the space. Some have reduced people's legitimate concerns to simple narratives like "the Ethereum community has become maximalist and intolerant."

I reject this notion and I feel that this is an unfair maligning of a broad and diverse community.

What some may miss that there are many here who are in favor of multiple types of chains and approaches, but just because they may not be in favor of the same approaches / chains that you are doesn't make them intolerant "maximalists." I own quite a bit of Bitcoin, for example. I also own tokens from other projects. But I am not in favor of chains like EOS for many reasons- does that make me an Ethereum maximalist?

Ethereum is more than a technology- it's an economic and social revolution. For many of us who believe in the value proposition of Ethereum, the origins and goals of other projects (both stated and unstated), are of paramount importance when evaluating them. I realize that for others, Ethereum is more of a technology revolution. For someone like me, it is all three.

And for some of us, we find certain approaches in the open source blockchain space to be particularly objectionable (e.g., combining lucrative token sales raising funds beyond what is needed for development, benefiting a narrow group of stakeholders like VC's and hedge funds, and combining those things with on-chain governance for an L1). For the record, those are the very reasons I rejected EOS. They are the same reasons why I reject other projects also, regardless of their technical prowess.

And perhaps even more importantly, we also pay close attention to how your project leaders and team members interact with those in the Ethereum community. Is it productive and does it engage the whole community? Is it consistently done in good faith? OR is it demeaning? Is it manipulative or divisive? EOS burned many bridges when they launched themselves as an "Ethereum killer." Other projects are now making similarly foolish mistakes, possibly in more insidious and spectacular ways.

I have a message for those projects:

It is not incumbent upon the Ethereum community to blindly accept such alternative approaches (be they technical, fundraising, governance, engagement, communication, etc.) and be labeled as "maximalists" when we reject them, or refuse to accept the tacit endorsement of them by others- it is incumbent upon those projects / communities to properly articulate their own value, as well as any additional value they may create for Ethereum. And it is incumbent on those projects to respectfully engage with all relevant parts of the Ethereum community in good faith through transparent and honest dialogue.

That's how you gain the support of the Ethereum community for a project- not forcing it down our throats and calling us intolerant when we question it.

I have long said that if I find a project which can decentralize the world better than Ethereum, I will sell all of my ETH and support said project. I look for that project regularly, and so far, despite all of the marketing narratives from competing (or complementary) projects, I still haven't found it.

Submitted March 09, 2019 at 08:09AM }
via reddit