Resigned after 11 months in office, why did a core member of the Ethereum Foundation leave again?

Author: bootly, BitpushNews

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) once again stands at a crossroads of personnel upheaval.
Ethereum Foundation Co-CEO Tomasz Stańczak announced he will step down at the end of this month. This comes just 11 months after he and Hsiao-Wei Wang jointly succeeded the long-time leader Aya Miyaguchi in March last year, forming a new leadership core.

His successor will be Bastian Aue. Very little public information is available about him; his X account was registered only eight months ago, with almost no public statements. He will continue to co-lead the organization that controls core resources and direction of the Ethereum ecosystem alongside Hsiao-Wei Wang.
This seemingly sudden personnel change is actually the inevitable result of internal conflicts within the Ethereum Foundation, external pressures, and strategic shifts intertwined.

A Crisis-Driven Year
To understand Stańczak’s departure, we must first look back at the context when he took office.
Early 2025, the Ethereum community was in a state of anxiety. At that time, the cryptocurrency market was generally bullish after the US elections, with Bitcoin hitting new highs repeatedly, and competitors like Solana gaining momentum. Meanwhile, Ethereum’s price performance was relatively weak, and the Foundation itself became a target of criticism.
Critics pointed directly at then-CEO Miyaguchi. Developer communities complained that the Foundation and frontline builders were severely disconnected, with conflicting strategic interests and insufficient promotion of Ethereum. Some questioned whether the Foundation was too “laid-back,” positioning itself as a “coordinator” rather than a leader, which was seen as causing Ethereum to lose its first-mover advantage.
As the “central authority,” the Foundation was expected to act decisively rather than remain passive.
Amid this public storm, Miyaguchi retreated behind the scenes and joined the board. Stańczak and Wang were suddenly thrust into the spotlight.

Stańczak was not an outsider. He is the founder of Nethermind, one of the core execution clients in the Ethereum ecosystem, playing a key role in infrastructure development. He understands technology, has entrepreneurial experience, and has a deep understanding of community pain points.
In his own words, the initial instructions he received upon taking office were clear: “The community is calling out — you’re too chaotic — you need to be more centralized and accelerate to respond to this critical period.”

What did he do in that year?
The combination of Stańczak and Wang indeed brought visible changes.
First, organizational efficiency. The Foundation cut 19 staff members, streamlined its structure, and tried to shed bureaucratic labels. The strategic focus shifted back to Layer 1, explicitly prioritizing scaling the Ethereum mainnet rather than letting Layer 2s operate independently. The upgrade pace accelerated, with more decisive progress on EIPs.
Second, attitude adjustment. The Foundation began releasing a series of videos on social media, proactively explaining Ethereum’s technical roadmap and development direction. This “outreach” approach contrasted with the previously more closed and mysterious image.
Strategically, Stańczak pushed several new directions: privacy protection, responses to quantum computing threats, integration of artificial intelligence with Ethereum. Especially on AI, he clearly saw the trend of “agent systems” and “AI-assisted discovery” reshaping the world.
On the financial front, the Foundation started discussing more transparent budget management and fund allocation strategies, aiming to address external concerns about the efficiency of treasury use.
Vitalik Buterin commented on Stańczak: “He has greatly improved the efficiency of multiple departments within the Foundation, making the organization more responsive to the outside world.”

The Subtext of the Departure Statement
Why leave in less than a year?

Stańczak’s departure statement is quite candid and somewhat thought-provoking. He provided several key points:
First, he believes the Ethereum Foundation and the entire ecosystem are “in a healthy state.” The time has come for a leadership transition.
Second, he wants to return to “hands-on product building,” focusing on the integration of AI and Ethereum. He says his current mindset is similar to when he founded Nethermind in 2017.
Third, and most intriguingly: “The Foundation’s leadership is increasingly confident in their decision-making and control over more matters. Over time, my ability to operate independently within the Foundation has diminished. If I stay longer, by 2026 I will mostly be just ‘waiting to pass the baton.’”

This statement hints at two implications: one, a new leadership team has already formed its own momentum and no longer needs his direct involvement; two, his actual influence may be shrinking—something that doesn’t sit well with someone used to hands-on entrepreneurship and strong initiative.
He also mentioned, “I know many ideas about agent-type AI are still immature or even useless, but this kind of experimental play defines the pioneering spirit of early Ethereum.”

This somewhat subtly criticizes the current state: as organizations become more “mature” and decision-making more “steady,” the wild, experimental spirit that once drove innovation may be fading.

Stańczak’s departure appears personal on the surface but reflects long-term challenges faced by the Ethereum Foundation.
Since its inception, the organization has been in an awkward position. Theoretically, Ethereum is decentralized, and the Foundation shouldn’t be a central authority issuing commands. But in practice, it controls significant funds, core developer resources, and ecosystem coordination voice, effectively playing a dual role as “central authority” and “regulatory body.”
This identity paradox has led to a long-standing dilemma: doing too much invites accusations of centralization; doing too little invites criticism of inaction. Miyaguchi leaned toward a “coordinator” role, which was seen as weak; Stańczak aimed to shift toward an “executor” role, which improved efficiency but naturally concentrated organizational power.

His departure exposes this tension: as the organization becomes more efficient and decisive, the personal space for founding members shrinks. For an ecosystem that must balance “decentralization” and “market efficiency,” internal friction is almost unavoidable.

What kind of person is Bastian Aue, who replaces Stańczak?
Very little public information. He described himself on X as having previously been responsible for “difficult-to-quantify but critical tasks” at the Foundation: assisting management decision-making, communicating with team leads, budget considerations, strategic planning, prioritization. His low-profile style contrasts sharply with Stańczak’s entrepreneurial aura.
Aue stated upon taking the role: “My decision-making is based on certain principled adherence to the attributes of what we are building. The Foundation’s mission is to ensure that truly permissionless infrastructure—centered on the cypherpunk spirit—can be established.”

This sounds more like Miyaguchi’s tone: emphasizing principles, spirit, and coordination rather than dominance.
Does this mean the Foundation will shift back from “radical execution” to “principled coordination”? We’ll have to wait and see.

Ethereum’s Uncertainty
Stańczak’s departure comes at a critical moment when Ethereum is discussing several major proposals. According to him, the Foundation is about to release key documents, including the “Lean Ethereum” plan, future development roadmap, and DeFi coordination mechanisms.
The “Lean Ethereum” proposal is jokingly called “Ethereum’s weight-loss era” by some community members—aiming to simplify the protocol, reduce burdens, and make the mainnet more efficient.
These strategic documents will profoundly influence Ethereum’s development path over the next few years. The change in core leadership at this juncture adds uncertainty to the implementation of these proposals.

On a macro level, Ethereum faces multiple challenges: competition from high-performance chains like Solana, Layer 2 fragmentation issues, new narratives around AI and blockchain integration, and the overall market sentiment affecting ecosystem funding and attention.
On the very day Stańczak announced his departure, ETH briefly fell below $1,800. If it continues to decline past this point, an awkward reality emerges: the total return for ETH holders might fall below the interest rate of USD cash holdings.

To put it into perspective: in January 2018, ETH first hit $1,400. Adjusted for US CPI inflation, that amount would be roughly $1,806 in February 2026.
This means that if an investor bought ETH in 2018 and held it without staking, after eight years, they would not only have failed to profit but might have earned less than simply holding cash in a bank account.

For the “ETH loyalists” who have believed all along, the real question may not be “who wins the ideological battle,” but “how much longer can they hold on?”

The only certainty is that this core organization, which controls one of the most vital ecosystems in crypto, is still searching for its position in a rapidly changing industry—and this path will undoubtedly be turbulent.