Ethereum community protests against "L2 over-commercialization", independent team promotes Ethereum R1 insisting on not issuing coins and relying on decentralization for fundraising.

The ecosystem of the Ethereum scaling solution Layer-2 (L2) is becoming increasingly complex, and some doubts about centralization have emerged. In this context, the Ethereum R1 solution, which emphasizes no native token and relies on donations, was born, challenging the existing model and aiming to return to the spirit of Ethereum's decentralization, and its advantages and disadvantages and ecological impact have attracted much attention. (Synopsis: Ethereum Fusaka upgrade scheduled for the end of 2025, removal of EOF on behalf of the community want to abandon EVM? (Background added: Ethereum blasted Solana is not hidden? Community proposal "GAS cap increased by 100 times", theoretical TPS soared through 2000) Ethereum scaling has always been a high-profile core challenge in the blockchain space, and in order to solve the problems of mainnet congestion and high transaction fees, Layer-2 (L2) is regarded as the critical path for Ethereum to achieve large-scale applications. However, with the recent emergence of other high-TPS public chains and alternative products, as well as the decline in the price of ETH coins, concerns have begun to emerge within the Ethereum community, whether the development direction of these L2s is consistent with the interests and decentralization spirit of the Ethereum base layer. Today (2) a group of independent Ethereum developers, launched "Ethereum R1", which is a rather conceptual L2 solution, its implementation does not include Layer2 native token ETH, working capital completely relies on ETH donated by users, and emphasizes decentralization and censorship resistance, maverick Ethereum R1, can bring a real decentralized demonstration to L2, and the launch of Ethereum R1 in the current environment, Represents the community's feedback on the recent strife over Ethereum's foundation. Ethereum R1 principle The core feature of Ethereum R1 is the "no native token" economic model, the Ethereum R1 team believes that the general L2 should be commoditized infrastructure, should be simple, fungible, and avoid relying on any centralized entity or introducing risk governance, they emphasize the core principles of "trusted neutrality", "decentralization" and "censorship resistance". As the Ethereum R1 team highlighted in an official statement, their launch was in response to concerns within the Ethereum community about the over-commercialization of many current L2 schemes, the introduction of complex governance tokens, and even the trend towards independent blockchains (similar to the new L1). These concerns focus on privately distributed tokens that could lead to inconsistent benefits with Ethereum's underlying layer, opaque or centralized governance mechanisms, and potential centralized control risks. Ethereum R1's no-native token model has potential advantages. First, it reduces the likelihood of speculation, making its value more easily tied to ETH, Ethereum's own. Second, this clean design may facilitate future interoperability between different L2 networks. It seeks to build a neutral, minimalist, general-purpose rollup layer that aims to reduce the centralized dependence on specific decentralized application (dApp) vendors and serve as a pure transaction processing layer to counter some L2 trends that are increasingly like independent L1s. Ethereum R1's Challenges and L2 Ecological Outlook Although Ethereum R1's philosophy is more in line with the original spirit of Ethereum, its unique operating model also faces significant challenges, first of all, the sustainability of funds, a model that relies entirely on donations, and there is greater uncertainty about its long-term development and operating funding sources compared to those L2 solutions that are backed by venture capital and have independent tokens as a means of financing and incentives. Lack of native token as an incentive mechanism, how to attract enough developers to build applications on its platform in the highly competitive L2 ecosystem, and attract enough users to trade, is a real problem, especially in the complex zero-knowledge proof technology (ZK-Rollup) research and implementation, tokens are usually an important means of financing and incentives. This makes the tokenless L2 model potentially inferior to its token-based competitors in terms of ecosystem building, developer incentives, and ability to invest in cutting-edge technology. But despite this, the emergence of Ethereum R1 also injects an emphasis on decentralized value into the current out-of-focus Ethereum Layer-2, which directly criticizes that the current Layer2 may not have enough Ethereum value, reminding the entire community that there is not only one way to expand, and it is equally important to return and adhere to the core value of the blockchain. Whether Ethereum R1 can survive may be a big question, but its emergence and the ideological nature of the reminder have sounded the alarm for the increasingly homogenized Layer2, which has lost the value of its native cryptocurrency, and whether Ethereum as a community can accommodate the existence of idealism and maintain the value of its existence also tests the subsequent funding operation of the Ethereum Foundation. Related reports Jesse, head of the base chain, responded to the Chinese community: What is the difference between Solana positioning? Can it help Ethereum out of trouble? Ethereum proposes "square root dynamic rate" reform! Can balancing users and reward builders save community confidence? Ten years of baptism, can Ethereum still usher in a "great skyrocket"? "Ethereum community protests "L2 over-commercialization", independent team pushes Ethereum R1 to insist on not issuing coins and relying on decentralized fundraising" This article was first published in BlockTempo's "Dynamic Trend - The Most Influential Blockchain News Media".