NamadaFlow Weekly Update
Dec 24 - 31, 2025
Namada’s week was heavy as it saw talent departures, stalled funding talks, and an existential fork in the road for the protocol. As engineers exited, token relaunch scenarios resurfaced, and even an Ethereum migration entered the chat, validators were left balancing real technical progress with the uncomfortable reality that Namada’s future now hinges on decisions that can’t be postponed any longer.
Brent’s Departure and Heliax Layoffs Announcement
On December 30, Brent (drongulomingus) announced he and several Namada colleagues will be leaving Heliax on January 1 after approximately 3.5 years with the company. This represents a significant loss of core engineering and project management talent. The announcement generated emotional responses from the community, with some criticism about how the news was framed and its potential market impact.
December 25 Validator Circle: Two-Path Decision Framework
The Christmas Day Validator Circle revealed Gavin is 80% confident Knowable will abandon NAM to launch a new token/project due to failed funding negotiations. Two potential paths were outlined: (1) AF providing 1% XAN supply to enable NAM holder exit, with recovered NAM sold to new backers for funding, or (2) completely new token launch. After 6 weeks of negotiations, no progress has been made and AF has not confirmed support.
Ethereum Migration Exploration and Technical Vision
Gavin revealed the team is exploring launching MASP on Ethereum instead of continuing with the current Cosmos-based architecture. This would provide full Ethereum compatibility, ERC20 token standard, CCTP v2 bridge access, and eliminate the complexity of the current 240k-line codebase while aligning with the v2 vision of using Anoma for cross-chain architecture.Link
Community Concerns About Token Relaunch Success Rate
Validators expressed significant concerns about launching a new token, citing historical precedents where token relaunches typically fail except in cases of hacks or exploits. The concern is that current NAM holders would see this as an opportunity to exit rather than reinvest, potentially dooming the new project despite the technical merits.
Anoma Foundation Engagement and Timeline
Gavin mentioned that cwgoes signaled interest in joining discussions after the holidays, likely at the January 7 Validator Circle rather than the January 1 Bonfire. This represents the first indication that AF might directly engage with the community on these critical decisions, though it remains uncertain whether he would participate on behalf of AF or as an individual.
Technical Operations and Infrastructure Issues
Several technical issues were reported during the period, including Horcrux signing problems, node panics due to “too many open files” errors, and jailed validators. The community continued to provide technical support despite the organizational uncertainty. Concerns were raised about inactive/jailed validators still receiving delegation program funds and subsidies.