Open questions - decided, provisionally
Every entry here is a call the owner made on judgment, at the simplicity-vs- universality boundary - good enough to ship, honestly held, and actively open to a better answer. This is not indecision: each has a decision in force (linked). It is an invitation: argue a better option in an issue or PR referencing the entry. A winning challenge lands as a superseding record or rule change, and the resolved entry is deleted - the resolution lives in the record that settled it.
How this differs from the neighbors: an ADR records a fork taken; an idea is a feature that may never ship; an open question is a standing "I chose X, convince me of Y". One file per topic; entries that carry real deliberation history keep it in an Options weighed section - for the future maintainer who would otherwise re-derive it. (This was one flat file until it outgrew itself - as its own meta entry predicted it would.)
The index moved. Every topic above is a type: open-question row in backlog.md now (per ADR-046), so the dashboard's Backlog tab shows all of them alongside build work and ideas without opening this file. Each backlog.md row states the decision in force (or that there is none) and the doubt in one line, and links back to the topic's file here for the full argument - this folder still carries the deliberation, backlog.md carries the listing.
This is the front door for new maintainers
A single author decided every entry above, which is the honest weakness of this project. Winning a challenge here is the most valuable contribution it takes - more than a feature, because a rule this project got wrong propagates into every repo that adopts it.
You do not need to have used the standard to argue one. Each entry states the decision in force, the doubt in one line, and - where there was real deliberation - the options already weighed, so you can start from where the thinking stopped rather than from scratch. Bring evidence from how you actually work; "we ran the other way for two years and here is what broke" ends an argument that abstract reasoning cannot.
If your expertise is a technology rather than the method, this is the wrong repo to spend it in: Layer 1 is stack-agnostic by rule, so a TypeScript or Node opinion cannot land here no matter how right it is. It lands in repository-standards/node, which owns its own picks and its own doubts. Same for any future stack - one repo per technology, and each carries the argument for what it chose.