Author: shushu, BlockBeats
The Ethereum ecosystem has just experienced a reversal in the past two days, but the Ethereum community is not peaceful. Former team members of the zkRollup project Scroll have quarreled with the co-founder of Movement, who just ended their testnet and announced airdrops. Scroll accused Movement of code plagiarism, while Movement claimed Scroll's team behavior was improper, single-handedly damaging the reputation of the Layer 2 ecosystem. The official members of the Scroll team have not yet responded formally.
Why are they openly fighting?
The trigger for the debate occurred in someone else's comment section. @enshriningplebs stated, "We invented the concept of 'postconfirmations' to issue our tokens before going live on the mainnet." @seunlanlege mockingly replied, "Oh, so only Ethereum Foundation researchers invent some objectively meaningless garbage protocols, and that counts as cool, right? What double standards."
Movement Labs co-founder Rushi Manche then delivered a sharp remark, "That's right, only Uniswap and Flashbots are allowed to do that because they align with Ethereum's interests (by the way, I really like their architecture). As for the thousands of popular terms we've created for those useless EVM L2, that is much more ethical."
Then, former Scroll team member Toghrul directly retorted Rushi's ironic remarks by saying, "Stop pretending to be so high and mighty, okay?"
"Let's talk about those popular terms created by EVM L2?" He believes that the new term "postconfirmations" is essentially just a name change for "preconfirmations," and that this renaming was prompted by their self-proclaimed 'fast finality Rollup' being ridiculed. Even more absurdly, they themselves don't even understand whether it's optimistic Rollup or sidechain, as these two architectures are inherently contradictory.
Toghrul mentioned that he bluntly raised these issues in group discussions, but the response was, "No one uses them, so they can't be considered original," leaving him puzzled. He also stated that Movement's entire codebase is almost a fork from Aptos, with only minor changes. In contrast, those so-called "useless EVM L2" have produced many widely used core technologies, such as Polygon inventing Plonky2, Arbitrum creating a general fraud proof based on Wasm, while Movement can't even figure out EVM support.
Rushi did not hold back either, directly stating, "High and mighty? Are you kidding me?" and then began to list Scroll's offenses one by one.
1. For years, they have exploited the community but launched a predatory incentive plan that ultimately shifts the burden onto ordinary investors.
2. The team has been selling secondary market shares for several years before the launch.
3. Other team members were forced to buy in at an $18 million valuation, while senior leaders sold at the same time.
4. You even directly allocated airdrops to your own wallets for cashing out.
5. Designed the most predatory token economic model, aimed at harming every community member.
To directly express Rushi's anger, here is his original text for readers to feel:
"Today, because of what you've done, almost no one wants to identify as an EVM L2 anymore. You delivered the worst product, and the entire community and ecosystem are filled with resentment towards you; it's clear you are just idle. I won't comment on technical matters; that should be handled by researchers. You have been 'hounding' me for several months while I have remained silent and respectful. Technical debates are one thing; I believe we can improve, but this has crossed the line. If you want to debate with Franck on Spaces, go ahead. Otherwise, please improve your own chain and stop making it look like a complete scam."
He also added, "I have respect for some members of your team, but Scroll and you can be said to be one of the worst participants in the field (at least 6 of your colleagues—half of whom have left—have come to apologize to me for your actions)."
"In the past two months, a quarter of your team has applied for our positions. I really like many people on your side, so I feel a bit sorry, but please don't elevate yourself too much, haha."
Finally, Rushi said, "I am actively searching for 'Scroll scam' and learning more about it. @toghrulmaharram, don't think about coming to trouble me, haha."
The controversy of Scroll
At the beginning of the year, Starknet sparked outrage over the term 'electronic beggar.' Coincidentally, Scroll also made the same mistake, with its senior researcher Toghrul Maharramov directly referring to users as 'electronic beggars' during a confrontation, and even using malicious terms like fxxk when mocking users for seeking airdrops.
On September 15, the Trump family's cryptocurrency project World Liberty Financial announced that Scroll co-founder Sandy Peng would become an advisor to the project, which the community sees as an example of the Scroll team's ability to maintain network relationships.
In October, Scroll became the first pre-market trading project on Binance and announced its token economics. However, this news sparked community skepticism, accusing Scroll of having too low an airdrop quota while Binance Launchpool's quota ratio was too high, clearly trying to curry favor with Binance.
From the data, the total supply of SCR is 1 billion pieces, with an initial circulation of only 190 million pieces, accounting for 19% of the total. In the token distribution, airdrops only account for 15%, while the ecosystem and growth account for 35%, and Scroll DAO treasury accounts for 10%.
Even for the 15% airdrop, only 2% was circulating at TGE, with the remaining portion needing to be gradually unlocked over four years. In contrast, Binance Launchpool allocated 5.5%, with a TGE circulation ratio as high as 2.5%, and the remaining 17% also unlocking over four years. This design makes the initial circulation proportion of Launchpool far higher than that of community airdrops.
In addition, the Scroll Foundation accounts for 10%, core contributors account for 23%, and investors account for 17%. The tokens for core contributors and investors only begin to unlock a year after TGE, but the ecosystem, Launchpool, and Scroll Foundation occupy a large proportion in the initial circulation. This distribution mechanism amplifies the holding weight of Binance and large institutions, while the community's interests are greatly compressed, deepening the community's doubts about the design of Scroll's token economics.
The community used K-line to show Scroll what it means to be unique, even Scroll's project logo was ridiculed by the community.
On one hand, Scroll is very skilled at upward management; on the other hand, community management seems to be struggling. After the recent argument between former team members and Rushi, Movement clearly holds the upper hand in public opinion.
What does the community think?
Movement's ecological DEX WarpGate founder Leo Wong stated that Toghrul's attacks not only lack technical basis but are also filled with malice. He accused Movement of using terminology or architecture while Scroll's predatory actions are self-evident: internal sell-offs, exploitative token economic models, and community farming based on false promises. These actions not only tarnish Scroll's reputation but also stain the ideals of a fair blockchain ecosystem.
"If Scroll truly has technical criticisms, please let your researchers and engineers present them respectfully. Resorting to personal attacks and public smear campaigns only highlights your lack of confidence in your own platform and practices. The blockchain industry relies on cooperation, transparency, and trust, not this petty revenge behavior."
Developer Andrew Capasso stated that Toghrul's reshaping of criticism towards Scroll into a personal attack is actually an evasion of responsibility for the collective behavior of the team. He believes Toghrul is still entangled in the minutiae of wording and has not realized that the real issue is Scroll's intentional moral damage to the community.
"Whether you like it or not, this undermines your credibility. Responsibility and integrity are more important than technical details; you are not an obscure developer, but one of their strongest PR warriors. Keep being stubborn, and the Scroll logo will be forever branded on you, haha."
KOL crypto influencer said, "I won't make a judgment on right or wrong, but from these two conversations, there are some takeaways that I think everyone needs to know."
1. The era of raising valuations simply by aligning with a certain ideology is over.
2. Please spend money on people who really know how to do public relations with retail communities; those who don't know how to speak should keep quiet.
3. As a project party in the crypto space, you are wrong; retail investors are right. Don't compete with retail investors in research capabilities.
4. It's best to think of yourself as a retail investor and spend some time playing with what they like the most.
5. Brainwash VCs, not yourself.
Some also told Rushi that this was purely a malicious argument, "Toghrul's technical comments have nothing to do with Scroll's poor community management. This is a great mobilization for those who have been victimized to publicly support you, but you must realize that this is not 'a good faith public technical discussion.'"
However, Rushi believes that his response post is completely unrelated to technical issues, but merely points out that Toghrul's attitude towards him and the Movement team is filled with malice and insult. "I had been silent before because I could handle it myself, but I will never tolerate any insult and harm to my team."
