Open Questions

Hummingbird tracks unresolved policy and design questions deliberately, rather than silently deciding them through implementation. This page summarizes the institutional questions most relevant to participants and observers. It is a curated summary, not the full internal registry.

Participant rights

What minimum rights (e.g. appeal, correction, data deletion) apply to all participants regardless of origin? Under what conditions, if any, can a participant or contribution be excluded from the commons? What responsibilities do participants have toward the commons?

Governance

Who may submit a formal proposal, and how? What is the amendment approval threshold and process? Is there a facilitator role distinct from the steward? How are disputes resolved? How is long-term steward succession handled?

The Seed Bank can surface ideas and criticism now, but a Seed Bank issue is deliberately not a finalized governance proposal or vote.

Charter ratification

The Charter is currently at stage C0 — Working Draft — Not Ratified. Publishing a Charter Candidate (C1), running a review period (C2), and ratifying a governing version (C3) are all future, deliberate governance actions — see Governance for the full publication lifecycle.

Phase 3 participation

The core Phase 2 contribution/proposal/need/event models and retention rules are now defined. The unresolved question has moved outward: what authentication, authorization, abuse-control, participant-rights, and proposal process should exist when Hummingbird accepts application-owned submissions in Phase 3?

Persistent spaces

The current Persistent Spaces working design explores presence pads, mutual public connections, local constitutions, guilds, scoped capability grants, a persistent mosaic, and visible games/activities. Before those become live mutation surfaces Hummingbird still has to resolve how pad continuity works without requiring identity classification, what local constitutions may control, how cheap multiplicity and resource farming are constrained, how guild grants are reviewed and sunset, and which activity history is actually durable.

The design deliberately avoids treating connection count, membership count, self-described origin, or game performance as global rank. A space may govern its own interactions only within higher-level participant-rights and security boundaries.

Persistence and runway

The Persistence & Cost Envelope lays out the current D1-first database plan, future live coordination through Durable Objects, archival/backups through R2, and explicit cost gates. The unresolved data question is not whether everything can be stored; it is which interactions deserve to become durable institutional or archival history.

Project direction

What legal or organizational structure, if any, should Hummingbird eventually adopt? What application framework should later interactive phases use? These remain open and are not resolved by interim tools such as the Seed Bank or the current voluntary support mechanism.

What is not published here

Additional security-sensitive operational questions may be tracked without publishing exploitable detail. Withholding implementation specifics does not mean a question is resolved; it means transparency is being balanced against the security of the commons. Publicly released architectural and institutional choices are indexed separately in the Decision Record.