The Coordination of the Ethereum Ecosystem: Balancing Decentralization and Cooperation

An important societal challenge for the Ethereum ecosystem is how to find a balance between decentralization and collaboration. The strength of the ecosystem is that there are so many different individuals and organizations, including client teams, researchers, Layer 2 teams, app developers, and local community organizations, among others, who are all working on their vision for Ethereum's future. The main challenge is to ensure that all of these projects can work together to build a seemingly unified Ethereum ecosystem, rather than a multitude of incompatible small kingdoms.

In response to this challenge, many in the ecosystem have come up with the concept of "Ethereum harmonization". This includes the harmonization of values (e.g., keeping open source, minimizing centralization, supporting public goods), the harmonization of technology (e.g., following ecosystem-wide standards), and the harmonization of the economy (e.g., using ETH as a token whenever possible). However, the concept has historically been vaguely defined and may pose a risk of control at the societal level. If co-ordination simply means "being with a particular group", then the concept has failed.

To solve this problem, we should make the concept of coordination clearer, break it down into specific attributes, and express them in specific indicators. The list of metrics may be different for each person, and the metrics will change over time. However, we already have some solid starting points.

! [Vitalik: What are the values that need to be clearly aligned in the Ethereum ecosystem?] ](https://img-cdn.gateio.im/webp-social/moments-c9507fda734c0d080d327ff7b5496d17.webp)

Open Source: This point has two important values: first, the code can be audited to ensure security; second, it reduces the risk of proprietary technology lock-in, allowing unlicensed third parties to improve it. Not every part of every application needs to be completely open source, but the core infrastructure components that the ecosystem relies on should definitely be open source. The gold standard here is the Free Software Foundation's definition of free software and the Open Source Initiative's definition of open source.

Open Standards: Strive for interoperability with the Ethereum ecosystem and build based on existing open standards (such as ERC-20, ERC-1271, etc.) as well as standards under development (such as account abstraction, cross-L2 transfers, L1 and L2 light client proofs, upcoming address format standards). If new features that cannot be well served by existing standards are to be introduced, collaboration with others to draft new ERCs should be pursued. Applications and wallets can be evaluated based on the ERC standards they are compatible with.

Decentralization & Security: Avoid trust points, minimize censorship vulnerability, and reduce reliance on centralized infrastructure. The metric can be a "retreat test": if the team and servers suddenly disappear, will the application still be available? The other is the "Insider Attack Test": if a team tries to attack a system, how much will it be destroyed, and how much damage will it cause? An important formal test is the rollup phase of a data platform.

Conformity:

1. Contribution to Ethereum - The success of the project should benefit the entire Ethereum community (such as ETH holders and Ethereum users), even if they are not part of the project's own ecosystem. Specific examples include using ETH as a token (thereby enhancing its network effect), contributions to open-source technology, and a commitment to donate a portion of tokens or revenue to public goods in the Ethereum ecosystem.

2. Contribution to a Broader World - The goal of Ethereum is to make the world more free and open, enabling new forms of ownership and collaboration, and making a positive contribution to the significant challenges facing humanity. Is the project making progress in this area? Examples include applications that bring sustainable value to a broader audience (such as financial inclusion), donations to public goods that extend beyond Ethereum, and technologies that can be applied practically outside the crypto space (such as funding mechanisms, general computer security).

Obviously, the above content does not apply to every project. The metrics applicable to Layer 2, wallets, decentralized social media applications, and other projects will vary significantly. Different metrics may also change in priority: two years ago, it was acceptable for Rollup to still carry a 'training wheel' because it was still in the 'early stage'; today, we need to quickly at least reach stage 1. Currently, the clearest positive-sum indicator is the commitment to donate a portion of tokens, and more and more projects are practicing this; in the future, we may also find other aspects of indicators to measure positive-sum.

The ideal goal is to see more entities like certain data platforms emerge, tracking the performance of various projects in meeting the standards mentioned above as well as other standards proposed by the community. Competition between projects will no longer be about befriending specific groups, but rather striving to maintain consistency as much as possible under clear and understandable standards. The Ethereum Foundation should maintain a certain distance from these activities: we can provide funding for certain projects, but we should not become them. Creating the next similar project is itself a permissionless process.

This will also provide a clearer path for the Ethereum Foundation and other organizations (as well as individuals) interested in supporting and participating in the ecosystem, helping them decide which projects to support while maintaining neutrality. Each organization and individual can make judgments based on the criteria they value most and choose projects that align with those criteria. This not only allows the Ethereum Foundation but also enables others to become part of the incentive force for maintaining project consistency.

Only when the definition of "capability" is clarified can it truly become a selection system; otherwise, it is likely to turn into an exclusive and zero-sum social game. Regarding the concern of "who supervises the supervisors", the best solution is not to rely on all influential people being "angels", but through tried-and-true technologies such as the separation of powers. "Dashboard-type organizations" like data platforms, blockchain explorers, and other ecosystem monitors are excellent examples of this principle at work in today's Ethereum ecosystem. If we can further clarify the coordination of different aspects without concentrating all power in the hands of a single "supervisor", we can make this concept more effective and embody it in the fair and inclusive manner that the Ethereum ecosystem seeks.