When Builders Turn Critics: The Ethereum Foundation's Accountability Problem

Sonic co-founder Andre Cronje just dropped some uncomfortable truths about the Ethereum Foundation, and honestly, the crypto community needed to hear this.

Here’s the tea: Cronje spent over 700 ETH on infrastructure and deployment while building on Ethereum—and got absolutely nothing from the foundation. No funding, no business connections, not even a “hey, we see you.” Radio silence.

The Pattern Nobody’s Talking About

But here’s the thing—Cronje isn’t alone. Polygon’s Sandeep Nailwal raised similar concerns, and this comes right after Péter Szilágyi (the guy literally maintaining Geth, Ethereum’s backbone) publicly criticized the foundation’s compensation structure and governance mess.

Three major figures. Same frustration. Three different angles. That’s not complaints—that’s a signal.

What’s Really Going On?

The criticism cuts deeper than just “we want more money.” It’s about transparency and priorities. Here’s what’s bothering them:

• The foundation claims to support core developers and Layer 2 ecosystems
• Yet builders working on critical infrastructure get ghosted
• Nobody can clearly see where the resources actually go
• The decision-making process feels opaque and unaccountable

Why This Matters

Ethereum’s strength comes from its ecosystem—the developers, Layer 2 solutions, and infrastructure builders. If the institution supposedly stewarding this ecosystem is misaligned with what builders need, that’s a legitimacy crisis waiting to happen.

The question isn’t whether the foundation has money. The question is: does it even know how to allocate it effectively?

What’s your take—is this institutional dysfunction fixable, or does the community need to rethink how ecosystem funding actually works?