Loyalty and Recognition at Stake
Polygon co-founder Sandeep Nailwal has expressed growing frustration with Ethereum’s leadership, stating that the network continues to overlook Polygon’s position as a genuine Layer 2 solution. His comments have reignited discussions within the blockchain community about loyalty, recognition, and what it means to be part of the Ethereum ecosystem.
Nailwal, who also leads the Polygon Foundation, said he has started to question his long-standing loyalty to Ethereum. In a detailed post shared on X, he expressed disappointment that despite Polygon’s extensive contributions, the Ethereum Foundation and its wider community have offered no direct support.
“I did not come into crypto because of Bitcoin but because of Ethereum,” Nailwal wrote. He explained that his respect for Ethereum’s vision and admiration for co-founder Vitalik Buterin had guided many of his early decisions. Yet, he said his moral loyalty had come at a cost.
“I have always felt moral loyalty toward Ethereum even if it costs me billions of dollars in Polygon’s valuation,” he added. According to him, Polygon could have gained far more market value had it positioned itself as a separate Layer 1 network instead of staying tied to Ethereum.
He further stated that Polygon’s decision to identify as part of the Ethereum ecosystem has limited its market perception. “The Ethereum community ensures Polygon is never considered an L2 and is never included in the markets’ perceived Ethereum Beta,” he wrote.
Frustration Inside the Ethereum Ecosystem
Nailwal described the Ethereum community as increasingly divided, saying that it has become a place where major contributors feel neglected. “Why does it feel like every other week, someone with major contributions to Ethereum has to publicly question what they’re even doing here?” he asked.
He recalled being mocked by colleagues, including Akshay BD, who left Polygon’s early team to help build Solana. According to Nailwal, many developers grew tired of what he called the community’s “socialistic behavior,” where projects like Polygon were criticized based on “arbitrary technical definitions.”
He added that some investors have begun to question his duty to Polygon’s stakeholders. “If Polygon ever decided to call itself an L1, it would probably be valued 2–5× higher than it is today,” he said. He even compared valuations, noting that Hedera Hashgraph, an L1 project, is currently valued higher than several leading Layer 2s combined.
Buterin Responds with Praise and Technical Insight
In response, Vitalik Buterin acknowledged Polygon’s role in Ethereum’s success. He credited the network for hosting Polymarket, a major predictions platform, and for advancing zk-EVM technology. He also recognized Nailwal’s humanitarian efforts through CryptoRelief, which funds biomedical research in India.
Yet, Buterin explained that Polygon lacks a working proof-of-stake system that would provide it with full Ethereum Layer 2 security guarantees. He said the network could adopt an existing zero-knowledge proof stack, as newer systems are now cost-efficient and reliable.
“The technology has gotten quite good, with proving costs as low as $0.0001 per transaction,” Buterin said.
Nailwal has yet to reply publicly to Buterin’s remarks. His comments have stirred an essential question for both ecosystems: can Ethereum’s founders and contributors maintain unity while debating what defines accurate alignment in a decentralized world?