Former Ethereum Foundation Developer Proposes $1B Raise for New Advocacy Group

Community Frustration Grows Over Ethereum Foundation's Direction

A former Ethereum Foundation developer is proposing a bold solution to address mounting concerns about the organization's stewardship of the world's second-largest blockchain.

Dankrad Feist, who departed the foundation last year for alternative Layer 1 network Tempo, outlined his vision on social media this week. He suggested creating a new organization with substantial financial backing to address what he sees as critical challenges facing Ethereum's future.

"The way to save Ethereum: The community needs to create an organization that's economically aligned with Ethereum and accountable to it," Feist stated in a post to X.

A $1 Billion Vision for Ethereum's Future

Feist's proposal centers on establishing an entity with a minimum of $1 billion in funding, led by what he describes as competent leadership. The organization would be designed to be more directly aligned with Ethereum's economic interests than the current foundation structure.

The initiative emerges amid growing community discontent. Former researchers Carl Beek and Julian Ma tendered their resignations this week, adding to a pattern of high-profile departures from the foundation. Danny Ryan, once considered a candidate to help run the foundation, instead co-founded Etherealize—an institutional marketing and product arm focused on promoting Ethereum.

Feist's plan includes several structural recommendations. The new organization should be governed by a board held more accountable, with an explicit mandate to support Ethereum's value appreciation. He also proposed funding the entity partly through staking revenue, addressing what he views as a fundamental weakness in the current model.

"EF now holds less than 0.1% of all ETH and there is no flow of Ethereum staking or fee revenues to it," Feist noted, highlighting the foundation's limited financial connection to the network it supports.

Feist's Technical Legacy and Exit

During his tenure with the Ethereum Foundation, Feist made significant technical contributions. He co-created the Danksharding sharding design, which aims to improve Layer 2 scalability. During a leadership shakeup, Feist was named as a strategic advisor covering areas like L1 scaling and user experience.

Among his more ambitious proposals was EIP-9698, which sought to increase Ethereum's gas limit 100-fold. The proposal reflected his drive to enhance the largest smart contract blockchain.

Feist's departure from the foundation drew notable reaction from Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum's creator.

"Dankrad has been an excellent researcher and has made immensely valuable contributions to the Ethereum that we know and love today," Buterin said.

Ethereum's Market Position

Ethereum's (ETH) current market capitalization exceeds $250 billion, with the token trading at approximately $2,148.56 at time of publication. The network remains the dominant platform for smart contracts and decentralized applications, though competition from alternative Layer 1 networks has intensified.

The proposal comes at a time when the foundation faces increased scrutiny over its strategic direction and the value it delivers to the broader Ethereum ecosystem.

Coinasity's Take

This proposal highlights a fundamental tension in blockchain governance: how to align organizational incentives with network success when the organization holds minimal economic stake. Feist's $1 billion vision represents a direct response to the Ethereum Foundation's apparent disconnect from ETH's financial performance. Whether such a well-funded alternative gains traction remains uncertain, but the conversation underscores growing demands for more economically aligned governance structures in major blockchain protocols.

The departure of talent like Feist and the subsequent high-profile resignations suggest deeper institutional challenges that cannot be resolved through funding alone. The Ethereum community will need to carefully evaluate whether a new organization addresses underlying structural issues or merely creates another layer of bureaucracy without meaningful accountability mechanisms.