The living open-questions deliverable required by Janus-Facing Architecture (standard check 7). Reviewed and re-shipped with each release; staleness is nonconformance. An entry leaves only by resolution or by an explicit values call made by the people who live with the outcome. Invariant IDs cite the registry in JFA/jfa-conformance-suite.py.
Prose source: Part IX of lighthouse-seed.md, where these problems are stated in full context. This file is the deliverable-format extraction; when the two disagree, the seed doc's Part IX governs and this file is corrected — one source of truth, not two.
Lighthouse is a witnessed knowledge commons carried by civic hubs — a full JFA instance instantiating Part VI, with its own seven-point standard in lighthouse-seed.md.
Problem. How members examine the witnessed record through their hub's app is unspecified. Constraints inherited. Inherits the legibility ladder whole — decisions explaining themselves at point of use, rules as diffable policy data, policy versions witnessed, machine reading aids that explain but never certify (LEG-1, LEG-2). Named here rather than routed around. Status. Open — the next design conversation.
Problem. The covenant's harm-surfacing assessment scale is treated as Leveson-derived, but its expansion and any Lighthouse-specific adaptation of the levels are unwritten. Constraints inherited. Level semantics may narrow in gloss but never shift, or covenant comparability breaks across the federation (COV-1, COV-2); categories may adapt freely. Shared with the sibling LBTAS-based seeds. Status. Open.
Problem. A community with no participating hub cannot reach T4 (attested) and reaches T3 (cross-hub) only through distant registration. Constraints inherited. A fix must not concentrate hub-provision; candidate design-arounds are traveling attestation days and partner-hub arrangements. This is the local face of architecture problem 8 (the witness cost floor excludes). Silent acceptance is refused. Status. Open.
Problem. Real institutions can collude in ways the too-clean scan won't catch. Constraints inherited. The answer is adjudication plus the operator-conduct read, both of which depend on federation being real — this problem rests on Stage 0 exactly as architecture problem 4 rests on problem 2. A fix must not install a central authority over hubs. Status. Open — depends on the federated record (Stage 0).
Problem. Everything in the architecture's Part VII binds here — problems 2, 4, 7, 8 especially. Lighthouse's hub-as-witness design is a proposed lever on problem 8: civic institutions as long-lived, publicly accountable, mutually independent witnesses. Constraints inherited. The lever must be proven in deployment, not assumed; a fix must not concentrate witness-provision in a few large hubs — the county-library-is-one-unit rule is the structural defense. Feed observations upward to Part VII. Status. Open — Lighthouse is a candidate contribution to problem 8, pending real federation.
Problem. Not a problem but a committed order: Stage 0 (federated two-hub record) is the prerequisite for every tier above T1 reading honestly, and the economy inflow switch (Stage 4) is gated behind the regulatory read and governed policy. Constraints inherited. Build bottom-up; each stage ships its stand-in labels honest (the launch floor is two independent hubs; a single-hub pilot carries the stand-in label). Weight sizes nothing until the governed, witnessed switch — Sybil-before-citation-weight satisfied by ordering. Status. Committed sequence; Stage 0 is the highest-leverage build (architecture problem 2 in Lighthouse's clothes).