In the Ethereum ecosystem, balance is one of the most important governance challenges—or more accurately, the integration of decentralization and cooperation. The strength of this ecosystem lies in the wide array of individuals and organizations—client teams, researchers, layer two network teams, application developers, local community groups—who are all working towards their respective visions of what Ethereum could become. The main challenge is to ensure that all projects collaboratively build an Ethereum ecosystem, rather than 138 incompatible territories.
To address this challenge, many in the Ethereum ecosystem have proposed the concept of "Ethereum Consistency." This may include value consistency (e.g., open source, minimizing centralization, supporting public goods), technical consistency (e.g., collaborating with standards within the ecosystem), and economic consistency (e.g., using ETH as a token whenever possible). However, this concept has historically been poorly defined, leading to the risk of social control: if consistency means having the right friends, then "consistency" as a concept fails.
To tackle this issue, I believe we should clarify the concept of consistency by breaking it down into specific attributes that can be represented by specific metrics. Each person's list will differ, and the metrics will inevitably change over time. However, I think we already have some solid starting points.
Open Source: This is valuable for two reasons: (i) the code can be audited for security, and more importantly, (ii) it reduces the risk of proprietary lock-in and allows third parties to make improvements without permission. Not every part of every application needs to be fully open source, but the core infrastructure components that the ecosystem relies on absolutely should be. The gold standard here is defined by the FSF Free Software Definition and the OSI Open Source Definition.
Open Standards: Strive for interoperability with the Ethereum ecosystem and build on open standards, whether they already exist (e.g., ERC-20, ERC-1271...) or are under development (e.g., account abstraction, cross-L2 transfers, L1 and L2 light client proofs, upcoming address format standards). If you want to introduce a new feature and existing standards do not serve well, collaborate with others to write a new ERC. Applications and wallets can be rated based on the number of ERCs they are compatible with.
Decentralization and Security: Avoid points of trust, minimize censorship vulnerabilities, and reduce reliance on centralized infrastructure. Natural metrics are (i) The walkaway test: If your team and servers disappear tomorrow, can your application still function? and (ii) internal attack testing: If your team itself attempted to attack the system, how much damage would it cause? An important formalization is the L2beat aggregation stage.
Positive Sum:
Ethereum-facing: The success of a project should benefit the entire Ethereum community (e.g., ETH holders, Ethereum users), even if they are not part of the project's own ecosystem. Specific examples include using ETH as a token (thus contributing to its network effect), contributions to open-source technology, and commitments to donate a certain percentage of tokens or revenue to public goods in the Ethereum ecosystem.
World-facing: Ethereum aims to make the world a freer and more open place, realizing new forms of ownership and cooperation, and making a positive contribution to the significant challenges humanity faces. Does your project achieve this? Examples include applications that bring sustainable value to a broader audience (e.g., financial inclusion), donating a certain percentage to public goods outside of Ethereum, and building technologies with utility beyond cryptocurrency (e.g., financing mechanisms, general-purpose computer security) that are actually used in those environments.
Ethernodes
Ethereum node map, source ethernodes.org
Clearly, the above standards do not apply to every project. For layer two networks (L2s), wallets, decentralized social media applications, the applicable metrics will vary greatly. Different metrics may also change in priority: two years ago, it was acceptable for Rollup to use "training wheels" as it was still in the "early stages"; today, we need to reach at least the first stage as soon as possible. Nowadays, the most obvious positive sum metric is the commitment to donate a certain percentage of tokens, and more projects are doing this; in the future, we may also find other aspects of positivity that can be clarified with metrics.
My ideal goal is to see more entities like L2beat emerge to track how various projects are performing against the above standards and other community-proposed standards. Projects should not compete to befriend the right people but should compete to remain as consistent as possible based on clear and understandable standards. The Ethereum Foundation should maintain a certain distance in this regard: we fund L2beat, but we should not become L2beat. Creating the next L2beat is itself a permissionless process.
This will also provide a clearer pathway for the Ethereum Foundation and other organizations (and individuals) that wish to support and participate in the ecosystem while maintaining neutrality to decide which projects to support and use. Each organization and individual can determine which standards they care about most based on their judgment and choose projects partly based on how well those projects meet those standards. This makes it easier for the Ethereum Foundation and everyone else to be part of the incentives that drive projects toward greater consistency.
Only by clearly defining "merit" can elite governance be achieved; otherwise, you will have a (potentially exclusive and zero-sum) social game. For concerns about "who oversees the overseers," the best solution is not to place all hope in ensuring that all influential people are angels, but rather through time-tested techniques like decentralization. "Dashboard organizations" like L2beat, block explorers, and other ecosystem monitors are excellent examples of this principle at work in today's Ethereum ecosystem. If we can do more to clarify the different aspects of consistency while not concentrating on a single "overseer," we can make this concept more effective, as well as fair and inclusive, just as the Ethereum ecosystem strives for.