Post History

What works out pretty ok with the tools we have, is to make a separate meta thread per help page. Example from when we started up Software Development: [Community feedback: What type of questions can I ask here? ](https://software.codidact.com/posts/278648)

That is:

- Make a meta thread here tagged [site proposal main tag], [help-pages], [discussion] plus other relevant tags.
- Include a draft for the help page in the question.
- Include some manner of "rules for posting here" like I did in the example, in order to encourage high quality answers:
  > Please give feedback on specific items in the list that you agree or don't agree with and post a proposed change, so that the community can vote agree/disagree with your answer. This includes change of wording etc. If something is missing that you feel should be added to either on-topic or off-topic, please propose that too.
  > 
  > In order to label something "community consensus", we should preferably have a strong majority for/against. (Voting on this particular question here is kind of meaningless, please vote on answers.)
  > 
  > One item at a time please! Don't hesitate to post several answers.

  Maybe we can eventually streamline guidance for this with a default template text.

- Let the post sit on meta for a couple of weeks at least.
- Someone who is either one of the active founders of the new site or a proposals.codidact mod may then review all answers and assemble a help page based on votes. (Maybe items with +3 or +5 score and not too many down votes.) Then either post a new draft if it needs to be iterated further, or post a complete help page once the proposal is launched.

Advantages:
- Highly democratic and easy to determine consensus by checking votes. We tend to like community-driven things around here :) It works _much_ better than for example a community wiki where one person can unilaterally edit anything at a whim without prior discussion or consensus.
- Easy to follow separate discussions as they will be categorized as per each answer posted.

Disadvantages:
- Hard to get an overview of the work in progress.
- Somewhat subjective to assemble and with a risk of mistakes as there's a lot of manual copy/paste and editing.

I think this way of working through Q&A could probably be improved a lot by a moderator or other suitable person making each answer as "status complete - added YYMMDD", then edit and update the draft in the question itself. Then the meta thread can live on for a long while as long as someone actively maintains it.