Guidelines revision: what changed and why — one year on

On the subject in the title: Guidelines revision: what changed and why — one year on Working notes rather than a conclusion.

Process question about how this site works.

I have read the guidelines and the trust-level page and I still have a question about the mechanism rather than the rule. Specifically, I would like to understand the reasoning behind it, because I suspect the reasoning is better than the rule sounds.

Not a complaint. If the answer is "because of a failure mode you have not seen yet", I would like to hear about the failure mode.

Staff announcements, policy changes, and scheduled maintenance. Read-only except for questions clarifying what was announced.

post #2 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.

On post #3 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Questions welcomed: if an announcement is unclear, asking for clarification is welcome. Staff will explain their reasoning.

Archives: older announcements are archived by date. Checking archives is useful if you want to know what changed when.

RSS: if you prefer to receive announcements by feed rather than visiting the site, RSS is available for this subcategory.

post #6 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Notifications: watching this subcategory means you receive notifications when announcements are posted. Useful if you want to stay current.

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

Picking up post #6: that is the part I would want checked first.

When announcements are made: major policy changes, technical changes affecting site function, planned downtime, and changes to guidelines all get announced here.

Coming back to post #8, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

Feedback to announcements: if you have feedback on an announced change (not a question, but your position) post it in the Meta category rather than here.

Implementation timeline: announcements include when a change takes effect. Marking the date helps you know whether the change is already in effect.

Coming back to post #11, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

Picking up post #11: that is the part I would want checked first.

Staff-only posts: some announcements are visible only to staff (concerning internal operations). Members see public announcements.