We need a world standard climbing ethic

It is just natural that different ethics apply in different climbing communities. In Frankenjura, most hard core locals sometimes down climb (or jump without a pad) in order to later and for ever take advantage of the preclipped carabiners. In other areas, this liberal down climbing ethics have stopped meaning that you can normally not claim an ascent if it was done with three or more pre-clipped. The problem occurs when different down climbing ethics are used on the same routes. It could seem unfair, for the conservative, trying to repeat an 8c if the FA was done with the fourth preclipped as the FA could, after much training, jump/climb down it. Clipping all could instead mean that it becomes an 8c+ or even a 9a? The Koyamada affair is another example that a world standard ethics are needed when it comes to define how to start boulder. In USA, sit starts are no so common as in Europe and instead defined crouched starts, i.e. "the American sit" are practiced. Sometimes this creates unfairness and controvercies. If we would have a world standard ethic, we would see less back stabbing/controversies and we could instead focus on the beauty of the climbs. 8a suggested climbing ethics. In bouldering it might seem easier to opt for the Euro starting ethics but even so there will always be different possibilities for boulderers with different reach. The basic idea must be to copy how the FA did. What do you think can be done in order to minimize misunderstandings and controversies?