- Trending
- Comments
- Latest
A former Ethereum Foundation employee has sued the organization and its leaders, alleging she was fired after helping lead a staff objection to a mandate that included a pledge to “fall on our own swords,” and after telling management she had cancer.
The allegations were detailed in a November 10, 2026, report by cryptocurrency commentators Amy Castor and David Gerard on Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain. The report centres on a lawsuit filed by former employee Kayleen Fulton, who has named Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and Foundation co-executive director Bastian Aue in the complaint.
At the centre of the dispute is the organisation’s March publication, titled The Ethereum Foundation Mandate, a 38-page document intended to establish its long-term governance philosophy and direction.
The controversy began in February when the Ethereum Foundation circulated an early version of its mandate to employees. Among its provisions was a document titled the “Source Seppuku License,” which contained language requiring signatories to take their own lives with a sword if they failed to honour its commitments.
The original version reportedly ended with the declaration: “May we ritualistically fall on our own swords if we fail to uphold our solemn promise to Ethereum and the Infinite Garden.”
The language triggered objections among employees, with nearly 80 of the organisation’s approximately 250 staff members reportedly seeking its removal.
According to the report, one employee directly questioned management about whether signing the document meant they were required to commit suicide. Another raised concerns by referencing a colleague the organisation had lost to suicide the previous year.
Buterin subsequently assured employees that revisions were underway, particularly in areas that had generated concern and confusion.
However, when the final version was published on March 13, the controversial pledge remained. Rather than appearing as searchable text, it was incorporated into an illustration featuring anime characters and cats, written in Comic Sans.
The Ethereum Foundation also permanently recorded the document on the Ethereum blockchain as transaction calldata, making its contents publicly accessible.
Defending the decision to retain the controversial language, Buterin stated: “we feel that being inoffensive in that sense is not the energy we need right now.”
Beyond the suicide pledge, the mandate attracted criticism for its visual identity, which reportedly drew heavily from the Milady Maker NFT project.
The project had previously attracted controversy over its founder’s alleged connections to accounts promoting white-nationalist ideology and pro-anorexia content. These associations had reportedly become known within the Ethereum developer community before the mandate was published.
According to the legal complaint cited in the report, employees raised concerns about adopting the project’s aesthetic for an official organisational document.
Ethereum Foundation board member and co-executive director Hsiao-Wei Wang reportedly expressed opposition to the decision, stating that she “did not support applying the Milady aesthetic to a 1000-year vision mandate.”
Buterin, however, reportedly defended the styling, arguing that “the controversialness of those aesthetics is itself part of the point.”
The choice of imagery further intensified disagreements between employees and leadership over the organisation’s direction and the expectations attached to the mandate.
On March 20, co-executive director Bastian Aue reportedly instructed employees to sign the final mandate, warning that refusing would be treated as a resignation.
In response, Fulton and another employee, Trent Van Epps, organised a written objection to the requirement. Their letter attracted 53 signatures from colleagues who opposed being compelled to endorse the document.
Although the signatories initially retained their positions, Fulton and Van Epps were dismissed on April 6. By September 2026, most of the other employees who signed the objection had reportedly either resigned or been dismissed.
Fulton’s circumstances added another dimension to the dispute. She had been diagnosed with cancer in March and informed the organisation’s leadership about her condition and forthcoming chemotherapy treatment.
According to her complaint, Aue considered her upcoming treatment and the adjustments it would require incompatible with the organisation’s expectations of employee commitment.
The complaint states that Aue believed an employee preparing for cancer treatment could not provide the “exclusive and energetic focus” demanded by the Foundation.
Fulton is consequently pursuing claims involving disability discrimination and unlawful retaliation for participating in collective workplace action.
The lawsuit names Buterin and Aue, bringing the organisation’s leadership decisions into the centre of the legal dispute.
Fulton’s allegations have not yet been established in court, and the filing represents claims by the former employee rather than a judicial determination of wrongdoing.
Nevertheless, the case raises questions about the extent to which employers can impose new ideological commitments on employees, particularly when refusal is presented as grounds for termination.
For the Ethereum Foundation, the dispute also creates reputational challenges beyond its usual responsibilities of supporting blockchain development and ecosystem growth.
The organisation has yet to face a court ruling on the allegations described in the report. The outcome of the proceedings could determine whether the Foundation’s handling of the mandate and subsequent dismissals violated workplace protections.
As the case develops, attention will remain on the relationship between the organisation’s governance philosophy, its internal employment practices and the responsibilities of its leadership.
Copyright © 2025 - The Bit Gazette.
