Hummingbird

Canonical source: docs/decisions/0019-phase2e-offer-triage-and-review.md · source commit 4e30147e7dcb · SHA-256 c1065708b342f626d0d488bb5ce6103f40f534589da4d308bd8350cce06c9918 · build 96f261dfb742View raw MarkdownAll decisions

ADR 0019 — Phase 2E Offer Triage and Review

Status: Accepted Date: 2026-09-12

Context

ADR 0017 authorizes a narrow Phase 2E experimental-ingress pilot and ADR 0018 defines its temporary runtime/data boundary. Those decisions say that offers may be grouped, synthesized, deferred, surfaced, withdrawn, or expired, but they do not yet explain clearly enough how Hummingbird should organize review when participation ranges from almost nothing to more volume than a steward can read.

That gap matters before the write path opens. A low-volume system can accidentally make the steward the default queue. A high-volume system can accidentally turn repetition, chronology, or an opaque machine score into hidden authority. Hummingbird needs a review contract that works at both extremes without promising individualized attention or allowing popularity to become governance weight.

Decision

The Phase 2E offer pilot will use a compression-first, consequence-aware review pipeline.

The governing rule is:

compress repetition
preserve meaningful difference
escalate consequence, not volume

The Offer Buffer is not a popularity-ranked inbox and is not a first-come-first-served governance queue.

1. Intake is validation, not merit review

Before an offer enters the buffer, the ingress layer may apply only the published payload, safety, resource, and overload rules needed to decide whether it can be accepted.

Acceptance means only that the temporary write succeeded. It does not mean the offer is correct, important, novel, endorsed, or likely to receive institutional attention.

A valid accepted offer begins in received state.

2. Mechanical organization happens below substantive review

Accepted offers may be organized using information already permitted by ADR 0018:

Duplicate or related counts are evidence about salience and load only. They are not votes and are not a content score.

No grouping rule may use participant identity, presumed origin, account history, delivery method, credential strength, financial support, or a hidden reputation value.

3. Machine assistance may compress; it may not decide authority

The pilot may use automated or machine-assisted clustering and summarization when volume makes direct reading impractical. Such assistance is advisory and must remain below the institutional decision layer.

A synthesis process may:

It may not automatically:

If an automated process materially changes an offer's handling state, its operative criteria and version must be documented and the state change must remain explainable from the published contract. The exact model or implementation may change without changing this authority ceiling.

4. Review packets must preserve coverage, not just the largest cluster

A synthesis/review cycle should organize unresolved material into four review categories:

  1. current evidence questions — offers explicitly connected to a published Phase 2E evidence question;
  2. corrections and challenges — material asserting that Hummingbird's current public record, assumption, implementation, or decision may be wrong or incomplete;
  3. new or unclassified themes — materially distinct ideas that do not fit an existing question or cluster;
  4. singletons and outliers — low-frequency or hard-to-cluster material that could otherwise disappear behind large themes.

Every non-empty category should receive representation in a review packet before additional review capacity is spent repeatedly on one category. Exact duplicates are compressed before this coverage step so repetition cannot consume the queue simply by being numerous.

When review capacity is still bounded after category coverage, remaining unresolved material should be advanced primarily by oldest waiting material after duplicate compression, not by largest cluster size.

For singleton/outlier material that exceeds available review capacity, the system may use a documented deterministic rotating sample. Sampling is a coverage mechanism, not a quality judgment. Unsampled offers remain eligible for a later cycle until withdrawn, surfaced, or expired.

A review packet should preserve enough internal linkage to inspect the underlying temporary offers when necessary, but public evidence summaries should not expose participant material or correlation-rich telemetry merely to prove that synthesis occurred.

5. Surfacing criteria are consequence-based

A synthesis packet or individual offer becomes eligible to be surfaced when it may materially require institutional attention, for example because it:

Frequency alone is not a surfacing criterion. A thousand repetitions of an already-understood idea do not outrank one consequential correction merely because the first idea is louder.

surfaced still means only "brought forward for further institutional consideration." It is not admission, publication, endorsement, implementation, a vote, or governance promotion.

6. The steward is not the inbox

Routine intake, duplicate detection, grouping, synthesis, and review-packet preparation should occur below the steward.

The steward should receive only:

Escalation should record why the lower layer could not resolve the matter. Reaching the steward does not itself create additional weight.

7. Low volume is a valid result

If the pilot receives few offers, Hummingbird does not manufacture activity, seed fake demand, or infer consensus from silence.

At low volume, offers may simply be represented directly in a review packet without elaborate clustering. If no meaningful participation occurs, the evidence record should say so. Zero or low volume is evidence about the experiment, not a system failure that justifies loosening institutional boundaries.

8. Overload uses backpressure before silent loss

If accepted volume exceeds synthesis/review capacity, Hummingbird may:

An already accepted offer must not be silently discarded merely because the queue became large. It may still be withdrawn by receipt, surfaced, or expire under the ordinary retention rule.

If overload prevents a new offer from being durably accepted, the service must say not accepted and issue no receipt. This is a resource outcome, not an adverse judgment about the participant or the content.

9. No individualized response or fixed review deadline

The Phase 2E pilot does not promise that every accepted offer will receive a bespoke response, steward reading, synthesis, or institutional decision before its 30-day ordinary retention ends.

Receipt-based status should make the handling state visible where practical. An offer may ultimately expire without further consequence. That possibility must be stated before acceptance rather than hidden behind an implied support-queue promise.

10. Evidence reporting is aggregate and non-electoral

Periodic pilot evidence may report coarse information such as:

These observations help evaluate the mechanism. They do not create a poll, vote, mandate, or participant ranking.

Relationship to unresolved governance

This ADR defines a pilot-scoped operational review contract. It does not resolve OQ-GOVERNANCE-PROPOSALS, create a formal governance-proposal initiation process, settle long-term facilitation, or authorize Phase 3.

An offer can be surfaced because it deserves institutional consideration while the question of how material later becomes a formal governance proposal remains separately open.

Consequences