What Are We Actually Talking About When We Discuss Coordination?
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
What Are We Actually Talking About When We Discuss Coordination?
Coordination does not always proceed smoothly, and when goals are unclear, mechanisms opaque, or consensus lacking, it often devolves into disputes over interests or disordered "collusion."
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsBy LXDAO
In modern society, coordination is everywhere. Whether it's choosing a restaurant for dinner with friends or formulating international policies, coordination plays an indispensable role. From cooperation between individuals to collaboration across groups, and even cross-chain operations in the blockchain world, coordination serves as a foundational force spanning diverse scenarios. However, coordination does not always proceed smoothly—especially when goals are unclear, mechanisms lack transparency, or consensus is absent—it often devolves into利益-driven disputes or disordered "collusion." This article explores the definition and types of coordination, its applications within the blockchain ecosystem, analyzes the underlying culture and practices, and offers suggestions for achieving efficient coordination.
Understanding Coordination
Definition of Coordination
Coordination refers to the way large numbers of participants work together toward a common goal. It is an extremely broad behavior: from deciding which restaurant to dine at tonight among friends, to high-level decision-making between nations, all represent forms of coordination. Coordination is one of the most powerful forces in the universe—effective coordination unites people and enables the accomplishment of great endeavors.
Good coordination can give rise to monumental achievements, such as collaborative drug development across departments or large-scale humanitarian relief efforts. Poor coordination, on the other hand, can destabilize order. For example, the Russia-Ukraine war arose partly from conflicting interests, leading to devastating loss of life. Similarly, recent unrest in South Korea reflects internal discord and failure in collective decision-making, resulting in social fragmentation and crises of trust—key consequences of failed coordination.
The Antithesis of Coordination
The opposite of healthy coordination is improper or unethical coordination, often described as “collusion.” A particularly dangerous form occurs when an individual coordinates only with a small clique while excluding others, potentially dragging the whole system into dysfunction—for instance, backroom deals during elections where a small group conspires to advance their own interests at the expense of the broader population. We commonly label such outcomes as “collusion.”
Coordination Practices in Blockchain
1. Coordination Between Individuals: Collaboration
When working with colleagues, numerous coordination challenges arise. How should team members allocate workloads? How do different roles within a team coordinate tasks? How can individuals use certain mechanisms to jointly reach decisions? This type of coordination—among people—involves governance, collaboration, and distribution.
Coordination Tools in the Blockchain Space
-
Coordinape: A protocol that rewards contributors based on peer recognition, ideal for decentralized teams.
-
CharmVerse: A management tool for building relationships and co-creating projects, helping team members stay aligned on tasks and progress.
-
FairSharing: An on-chain contribution allocation protocol enabling transparent and trustless reward distribution.
2. Coordination Between Communities: Cooperation
When one group interacts with another, coordination issues also emerge—such as how different communities collaborate, align around shared goals, or jointly organize events like hackathons. The aim of such cooperation is typically mutual benefit through pooling resources, sharing expertise, or solving common problems.
Examples of Coordination in the Blockchain Field
-
Hackathon Collaborations: Gitcoin frequently hosts cross-community hackathons, encouraging talent from various ecosystems to share knowledge and resources.
-
Joint Governance Protocols: Initiatives like cross-protocol proposals (e.g., multi-chain DAO voting) enhance efficiency in inter-community cooperation.
3. Coordination Between Chains: Cross-Chain Interoperability
Coordination between blockchains is another critical form. How can different chains adopt common cross-chain standards? How is information transmitted across chains? And how can chains achieve better interoperability?
-
Ethereum Interoperability Forum (EIF): During this year’s Devcon, a landmark event took place—the Ethereum Interoperability Forum (EIF). This gathering brought together key players across the Ethereum ecosystem who set aside competition to focus on a shared mission: making Ethereum truly interoperable.
Coordination rests on clarity, transparency, and consensus
Whether it's coordination between individuals, cooperation between communities, or interoperability between chains, the essence of coordination lies in establishing clear goals, transparent mechanisms, and broad consensus. With appropriate tools and methods, coordination not only reduces friction but also creates greater value for all parties involved.
How to Define a Coordination Standard
Coordination is rooted in clarity, transparency, and consensus. While we cannot define a single universal coordination standard, there are pathways we can follow to gradually establish effective coordination norms:
-
Transparent Governance: Ensure decision-making processes are open and visible to build participant trust. Use tools like Snapshot or CharmVerse to enable on-chain governance and increase transparency.
-
Equitable Resource Allocation: Distribute resources based on contribution or need to prevent waste and inequity. Implement data-driven allocation mechanisms using tools such as Coordinape and FairSharing.
-
Effective Feedback Loops: Establish clear feedback channels so each member understands how their work impacts the whole. Utilize platforms (like Discord or governance forums) for open discussion and iterative improvement of decisions.
Conflict Is Inevitable in Coordination
The antithesis of coordination is "improper coordination", commonly known as "collusion"—a scenario where a small group makes decisions that harm the wider community. Such situations often occur when coordination breaks down.
In reality, individuals and groups hold differing values and perspectives, making conflict unavoidable during coordination. To address these conflicts, consider the following approaches:
Establish Common Standards: Create clear processes to minimize disagreements caused by subjective judgment.
Listening and Negotiation: Allow all stakeholders to fully express their views and find balanced solutions through dialogue.
Last Resort: Forking
-
When conflicts cannot be resolved through coordination, the blockchain space offers a unique mechanism—"forking"—which allows opposing sides to pursue their own visions independently, avoiding prolonged compromise and hostility.
The DAO Incident: After a major hack, the community split over how to respond. One faction supported rolling back the chain, forming what is now Ethereum; the other upheld immutability, continuing with Ethereum Classic.
Steem and Hive Fork: When Justin Sun acquired the Steem network, governance tensions escalated. Dissatisfied community members eventually forked the chain to create Hive.
Culture and Coordination: Divergent Paths Across Ecosystems
Interestingly, cultural perspective plays a crucial role in community coordination—this is evident when comparing communities like Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Bitcoin's Coordination Model
-
Anyone can join—or leave—at any time.
-
If you disagree with Bitcoin’s current state, you can modify the client and fork away.
-
If you oppose a specific upgrade, you can choose not to upgrade your node and remain part of the Bitcoin network.
Ethereum's Coordination Model
-
Anyone can join or exit freely, but must align with Ethereum’s roadmap.
-
If you disagree with Ethereum’s direction, you may fork by modifying the client.
-
If you reject a particular upgrade and do not update your node, you will be excluded from the network and no longer participate in Ethereum.
When conversing with ChatGPT, the contrast between Bitcoin and Ethereum communities becomes vividly apparent:
-
Ethereum Community: Dressed in colorful, futuristic attire, interacting with advanced technology—embodying openness, collaboration, and innovation.
-
Bitcoin Community: Wearing simple, practical clothing, standing within an ancient fortress—symbolizing resilience, focus, and commitment to stability.
The Ethereum community tends to solve problems through open discourse and technological innovation, attracting diverse participants. In contrast, the Bitcoin community prioritizes preserving the integrity of existing rules and minimizing changes.
The comparison reveals how communities with different cultural backgrounds adopt coordination models aligned with their respective goals and values:
-
Bitcoin’s rules are simple and robust, making it well-suited for long-term value storage.
-
Ethereum’s flexibility and innovativeness make it an ideal platform for technical experimentation and application development.
Conclusion
Whether in cross-chain operations within blockchain or cooperation between different communities, the core of coordination remains constant: clear objectives, transparent mechanisms, and broad consensus. By combining suitable tools with cultural awareness, we can find balance amid conflict and generate greater value through collaboration. Understanding and applying the essence of coordination is a vital path toward sustained progress.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
@LXDAO_Official
