"No discussion, no democracy": Reflections on Ethereum technical governance in the midst of EIP 7702/3074 controversy

Recently, the Ethereum community has been engaged in a significant governance debate regarding EIP-3074. This proposal aims to bring the benefits of Account Abstraction (AA) to external owned accounts (EOAs). This event has highlighted key issues in the Ethereum governance process and sparked discussions on how to improve future decision-making.

Developer Derek Chiang has provided insights into these events and explores the lessons learned. Taiwanese developer Chen Pin commented: "Currently, it seems that 7702 is almost certain to replace 3074. You can see ZeroDev's thoughts on this dramatic change, which is almost like a 'rollback of the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement'."

Account Abstraction EIP-3074 has become a point of contention within the Ethereum community, with Vitalik proposing a new improvement proposal, EIP-7702.

Summary of the AA Event

A few weeks ago, EIP-3074, aimed at extending AA benefits to EOA users, was approved by the Ethereum core developers to be included in the upcoming "Pectra" hard fork. However, the proposal faced strong opposition from the ERC-4337 community, who raised concerns about centralization and compatibility with the Ethereum AA roadmap, advocating for the prioritization of EIP-4337 and its corresponding EIP-7560 (i.e., "Native AA").

Vitalik Introduces EIP-7702 as Intervention

To address the opposition, Vitalik Buterin proposed EIP-7702 as an alternative to EIP-3074.

This new proposal aims to achieve the same goals in a way that aligns better with EIP-4337 and the future AA roadmap centered around EIP-7560. Currently, core developers are discussing EIP-7702, with preliminary discussions indicating it may replace EIP-3074 in the Pectra hard fork.

Governance Process and Its Flaws

The handling of EIP-3074 left many feeling frustrated. The core issue was not the proposal itself but the approval process. EIP-3074 took years to be approved, only to face significant opposition from the 4337 community. Such back-and-forth could be avoided with a more inclusive and transparent governance process.

What Went Wrong?

Developer Derek Chiang identified key issues in the governance process:

• Lack of early communication with the 4337 community during the EIP-3074 deliberation
• Inadequate communication and consideration of concerns raised by the authors of 4337
• The lengthy process and subsequent reversal of decisions added to the sense of frustration

Mental Models Proposed for Ethereum Governance

Reflecting on these events, it became evident that both sides of the debate fell short in certain aspects. The root cause of governance failure lies in an unrecognized governance force: roadmaps.

The Crucial Role of High-Level Roadmaps in Governance

In Ethereum, core developers are guided by high-level "roadmaps" that determine various aspects of the network such as the vision and long-term goals for scalability and AA. These roadmaps are typically advocated by researchers and influential figures like Vitalik, exerting significant influence in decision-making.

Misalignment Between Core Developers and Roadmaps

Governance issues arise when roadmaps and core developers are not aligned. The 3074 proposal incident is a case where the AA roadmap centered around EIP-4337 conflicted with the core developers' approval of EIP-3074.

Vitalik's Role in Ethereum Governance

Vitalik Buterin plays a crucial role in Ethereum governance, akin to a CTO in a large corporation. While he doesn't make every decision, his vision greatly influences the network's direction. This vision aligns with community values, guiding researchers in roadmap creation, with core developers responsible for implementing these plans.

A Better Approach? VVRC Model

values ⇒ vision ⇒ roadmaps ⇒ clients model

To better understand Ethereum's governance, developer Derek Chiang suggests using the VVRC model:

1. Values (Community): Fundamental principles uniting the Ethereum community
2. Vision (Vitalik): Overall vision for Ethereum's development
3. Roadmaps (Researchers): Detailed plans aligned with the vision
4. Clients (Core Developers): Implementing these plans in the protocols

Improving Ethereum Governance

• Based on the 3074 incident, several suggestions for improving Ethereum governance can be proposed:
• Enhance transparency: Ensure visibility of EIPs under consideration to the community to avoid surprises
• Better communication: Regular updates on EIP statuses and active engagement with all stakeholders
• Community involvement: Allow time for community feedback, especially on EIPs with significant downstream impact
• Mutual recognition: Core developers and researchers should acknowledge each other's governance roles and strive for consistency

Conclusion

The 3074/7702 incident underscores the need for a robust and transparent governance process in Ethereum. By adopting a more inclusive approach and recognizing the interplay between community values, vision, roadmaps, and core development, Ethereum can avoid future governance pitfalls and continue its path of innovation.