On June 4, 2025, @Knox556 opened a slash on Ethos against @udiWertheimer for 202 score. Ethos listed both accounts as reputable at the time.
The case drew attention for more than the two people involved. Under the EIP-3.1 changes, Ethos noted, many users who had backed Udi risked losing credibility if the slash succeeded.
The accusation
@Knox556 summed up the case in one line, describing Udi as an:
“Unethical PvPer, Fudder, and Blocker of anyone who opposes him”
A slash is a formal accusation on Ethos that puts part of an account’s score on the line. Here, 202 points of Udi’s score were at stake.
Udi’s standing on Ethos
At the time of the slash, Udi had a strong record on the network:
- 98 reviews, 96% of them positive
- 5 vouchers, with 0.114 ETH vouched in total
That made the case a test of how a detailed complaint from one reputable account weighs against broad positive feedback from many others.
Why Udi’s supporters were at stake
Ethos pointed out that with the EIP-3.1 changes, a successful slash wouldn’t only affect Udi. Many of the people who supported Udi also risked losing credibility. The posts didn’t describe the mechanics of EIP-3.1 beyond that point.
Ethos counted 94 supporters of Udi and named some of them:
- @0xsammy
- @MINHxDYNASTY
- @JakeAndBakeMVHQ
- @BdgeScott
- @tokenbrother
- @0xWenMoon
- @zimmerallday
- @NedRyersonBing
- @kuyamark
This is what gives backing someone on Ethos weight: supporting an account ties part of your own credibility to how that account is judged. When that account faces a slash, the people behind it have a stake in the outcome too.
The outcome
The posts announcing the slash don’t record how it ended, so this article doesn’t say whether the slash against Udi was upheld or what happened to the credibility of the supporters named above.
This thread first appeared on X.
