# Why 4337 and 3074 authors are disagreeing, and who got it right

Source: https://docs.zerodev.app/blog/4337-and-3074-disagreements

## Summary

The authors of EIP-3074 and ERC-4337 disagreed over Ethereum's roadmap, and the article concludes both sides were partially right. The 4337 camp sees its validation-execution separation design as the only official, censorship-resistant account abstraction endgame, and it prioritizes censorship resistance (CR), arguing UX work should wait if it conflicts. The 3074 camp argues user experience is the more urgent problem. The main technical conflict was that 3074 allows "mutually exclusive transactions" that could make an EIP-7547 Inclusion List impossible to satisfy. The debate ended with EIP-7702 replacing 3074, which delivers UX benefits to EOAs while addressing 4337 community concerns about future CR compatibility.

## Article

EIP-3074 vs. ERC-4337: The Battle Over Ethereum's Future

This article analyzes the fundamental disagreement between the authors of EIP-3074 and ERC-4337 (and its native form, EIP-7560), arguing that the conflict is rooted in differing visions for the Ethereum roadmap rather than technical rivalry.

(Note: This discussion explains the context that led to the creation of EIP-7702, which replaced 3074.)

Core Disagreements and Priorities

The two sides clashed over two main philosophical points:

AA Endgame: The 4337 camp believes their design (based on validation-execution separation) is the only official, censorship-resistant AA endgame for the community to rally around. The 3074 camp views 4337 as merely one possible path.

Urgency: The 4337 camp prioritizes Censorship Resistance (CR), suggesting UX improvements should be delayed if they conflict with CR efforts (like EIP-7547 Inclusion Lists). The 3074 camp argues that User Experience (UX) is the more urgent problem, as Ethereum needs adoption and ease-of-use.

The Author's Stance

The author concludes that both sides are partially right:

4337 is the necessary AA endgame: The core 4337 design elements (validation-execution separation) are essential for building a truly decentralized, censorship-resistant mempool for smart accounts.

UX is the urgent priority: Delaying features like 3074 means stifling adoption. The current state of CR is "good enough" for the short term, and "what’s the point of making something censorship-resistant if no one uses it?" Shipping UX improvements now is critical for providing value.

Why 3074 Created Technical Conflict

The main technical issue was that EIP-3074 conflicts with EIP-7547 (Inclusion Lists).

3074 introduces the possibility of "mutually exclusive transactions" that could make an Inclusion List impossible to satisfy, potentially stalling the blockchain.

This conflict led to the argument that 3074 should be delayed so CR efforts (7547) could be merged first.

Conclusion and Resolution (EIP-7702)

The debate highlights the complex, non-hierarchical nature of Ethereum governance. The author supported seeing EIP-3074 through or replacing it immediately with a similar UX-focused EIP.

Ultimately, the process resulted in EIP-7702, which replaced EIP-3074. This outcome is viewed as positive, as EIP-7702 delivers the needed UX benefits to EOAs while incorporating changes to satisfy the technical concerns raised by the 4337 community regarding future CR compatibility.