I've noticed some strong tension towards @blockworks_ from parts of the Ethereum community lately. But I feel like we're overlooking the real issue here The core problem isn't Blockworks - it's an expectation mismatch. Some in the Ethereum community expect Blockworks to represent Ethereum, but they're a crypto media company covering the entire ecosystem: Solana, Celestia, Bitcoin, and yes, Ethereum too. You can't force a crypto media company to become an Ethereum media company. When Blockworks raises challenging questions about Ethereum, it's not FUD - these are often the same critical questions our core developers are grappling with. The central tension they highlight is real: how do we balance ETH the asset (solo stakers & decentralization) versus Ethereum the protocol (usability & L1 fee)? This is hard to resolve, but it's not Blockworks' job to resolve it for us. The solution is for Ethereum to own its narrative. The solution isn't to bash Blockworks for their takes (which are fair and justifiable). This follows a broader trend where brands go direct to their audiences rather than relying on intermediaries. For Ethereum, that means building direct relationships with developers and holders. The good news? This strategy is already being implemented. With the EF changes and leaders like @VivekVentures and @ethereumJoseph taking on community-facing roles, Ethereum is starting to control its own communication channels. Early evidence suggests it's working. The path forward is clear: Own our messaging. Acknowledge the tensions. Work on solutions. Keep people informed. And be okay when people disagree. Build bridges not walls