“Ethereum alignment” isn’t about substance (i.e., who actually provides the most value to the ecosystem), it’s about creating the most convenient narrative for ETH Your protocol can drive an immense amount of value to the Ethereum ecosystem over a number of years, but if it doesn’t elevate ETH to a privileged position and you instead accrue value to your own token, you might as well be a competitor You’re supposed to sacrifice your protocol’s own utility and value accrual all in the name of pumping someone’s ETH bags That’s why an subsidized infrastructure yield farm for restaked ETH that has delivered little to no real tangible value for users is considered more “Ethereum aligned” than a protocol who data products enabled the rise of Ethereum DeFi and scaled it into the hundreds of billions safely It’s a toxic cycle where even the most aligned are somehow considered not aligned enough, and get bullied the most until they are bled dry or pivot Only way to win is to not play the alignment politics game in the first place Sandeep’s comment sums it up well: >When Polymarket wins big, it’s “Ethereum,” but Polygon itself is not Ethereum. Mind-boggling. Personally I call this narrative socialism(Zach Rynes | CLG)