Movement CEO angrily accuses Scroll of seven sins: because of you, no one dares to do L2 in the future.

Original｜Odaily Planet Daily

Author | jk

On November 27, local time in the United States, Rushi Manche, co-founder of Movement Labs, passionately opened a microphone on the X platform, and Toghrul Maharramov, a former researcher at Scroll, started a debate on the listing of Move on X. **Among them, Rushi Manche lists the “seven deadly sins” in the development of Scroll and enumerates the shortcomings of Scroll. The popularity of this post in the community quickly increased.

Odaily Star Daily has summarized the background and consequences of this debate as follows:

The reason for this is that on November 25th, the Movement Foundation released the tokenomics of $MOVE and announced that the MOVE token would be pre-released before the mainnet went live. The reason given by Movement is this: “So, why did $MOVE launch before Movement made the Mainnet public?”

In order to properly initiate post-confirmation.

After confirmation, it is Movement that achieves the mechanism of Finality, which can be completed in one second (or even shorter time).

The final confirmation of Movement requires pre-established economic security.

By establishing economic security through $MOVE (via the liquidity deposit contract) before the public launch of the Mainnet on Movement, we can begin refining and confirming in the actual environment.

And this part is also a controversial part. An account named @enshringingplebs forwarded a comment saying, “Summary: This is because we all know that Token is the final product, not the entire network/chain.”

Later, the account posted a separate post saying, “Then we made up a whole post-confirmation narrative to release the token before the mainnet.” ”**

Source: X

This sarcastic post was then replied by Rushi, the co-founder of Movement, who said:

“Yes, only when Uniswap and flashbots do it are they allowed, because this aligns with Ethereum (by the way, I am a fan of this architecture).”

And it makes more sense for us to create k popular words for those useless EVM L2.

Then, Toghrul Maharramov, one of the protagonists of the war of words, joined in and quickly posted a post:

“Please list some popular terms created by EVM L2?”

You respond to the previously ridiculed ‘Fast Finality Rollup’ construction by using ‘post-confirmation’ (actually a renamed pre-confirmation). You can’t even agree on whether you are an optimistic rollup or sidechains (these two constructions are mutually exclusive).

I exposed your lies in a group discussion, and the best reason you can come up with is “no one uses them, so they can’t be considered the first” (???).

Your entire codebase is forked from Aptos, with only some minor modifications. Those ‘useless EVM L2’ have created some basic building blocks that everyone is using (such as Plonky 2 invented by Polygon, the Wasm-based universal fraud proof built by Arbitrum, etc.), while you are struggling to add EVM support.

Don’t be so self-righteous (Get off your high horse).

This post seems to have completely angered Rushi, who then replied to Scroll’s ‘seven sins’.

"Hey, Toghrul - I tried to remain relatively calm throughout your entire debate with Franck and Andreas, as I believe it’s overall beneficial to let researchers argue among themselves. -Note: Here, it refers to the previous argument between Toghrul and Movement researchers on confirmation and architecture, etc., on the X platform.

“Self-righteous”?

Are you kidding?

I have respect for some members of your team, but Scroll and you may be the worst performers in this field (at least 6 of your colleagues - half of whom are no longer here - have apologized to me for your behavior).

But let’s review what Scroll did?

• For many years, the community has been exploited and a predatory market plan has been launched, resulting in dumping on retail users.
• The team started selling Secondary Market Tokens years before the release.
• Other members of the team were forced to buy in at a valuation of $1.8 billion, while the leadership was dumping on them.
• You have also done the thing of airdropping to your own wallet and then dumping it.
• The most predatory tokenomics that harm every member of your community.

**Now, hardly anyone is willing to identify themselves as EVM L2, because of what you have done.

Obviously, you are bored after delivering the worst product, and your entire community and ecosystem hate this.

I will not comment on technical issues because researchers should discuss them on their own.

You have been attacking me for months, while I have remained silent and respectful.

Technical debate is one thing, I believe we can improve - but this has gone too far. If you want to have a space discussion with Franck, it’s up to you.

Otherwise, just improve your own chain and don’t make it look like an obvious eyewash.

Later, he followed up with a post that killed the killer.

**“One quarter of your team has applied for our job in the past two months. There are many outstanding talents that I like, so I feel very sorry, but don’t use the term ‘self-righteous’ in front of me, haha.” And there are many examples below of Scroll not meeting the community’s expectations, including Airdrop to their own Wallet or TVL Fluctuation.

Under this post, there are people who agree and people who disagree. The voices of dissent believe that Rushi’s discussion has gone beyond the scope of technical discussion, and they believe that ‘this is a good provocative discussion that allows those who have suffered losses to openly support you, but you must admit that this is not a ‘well-intentioned technical discussion in public places’.’

Later, Toghrul himself also replied below, saying: “First, I am no longer working at Scroll. Second, none of what you said refutes any of the points I previously made (referring to technical points); Third, do you really want to discuss practical operations related to eyewash? (implying that Movement also has similar behavior)”

Later, he sarcastically said on his personal page, “Brother, I plan to jump around on platform X in front of reporters and make misleading remarks, but I don’t intend to discuss technical issues with you.”

Among them, Toghrul also replied to Rushi’s accusation of “seven deadly sins” as follows:

"squeezed the community for many years – Mainnet was launched less than a year before TGE.

Selling in the Secondary Market for many years - any evidence?

As far as I know, no one is forced to purchase. People are given the option to receive Token in the final round of valuation.

Airdrop to your own Wallet - any evidence? Is Haichen’s Wallet used for the test chain, and his Wallet is excluded from the Airdrop (the team has explained this).

Possibly the most predatory tokenomics - this is just one viewpoint.

Okay, are you happy to make misleading remarks and then hide behind your researchers like a coward?

At this point, the debate between the two has come to a temporary conclusion. As for who has the upper hand in the remarks of the two, it depends on the opinions of the community - at present, there are clearly more people on Platform X accusing Scroll than accusing Movement.