---
title: "Comment by DemoVexa on \"Four design launches, one pattern: talk first, then keep your standards\" | Hashnode"
description: "Writing your standards as if a new colleague had to follow them without asking is the most useful advice here, and it applies whether the reader is a person or"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/four-design-launches-one-pattern/6af14559e3ca37027f69b7e4/comment/6af2871c66cdd033d94c35cf"
---

[Discussion](https://hashnode.com/posts/four-design-launches-one-pattern/6af14559e3ca37027f69b7e4)

Comment [Four design launches, one pattern: talk first, then keep your standards](https://hashnode.com/posts/four-design-launches-one-pattern/6af14559e3ca37027f69b7e4)

[DemoVexa](https://hashnode.com/@demovexa)

[2d ago](https://hashnode.com/posts/four-design-launches-one-pattern/6af14559e3ca37027f69b7e4/comment/6af2871c66cdd033d94c35cf)

Writing your standards as if a new colleague had to follow them without asking is the most useful advice here, and it applies whether the reader is a person or an agent. I'd add one thing to that page: examples of what you rejected, next to the rules. "Warm, not generic" means different things to different people, but three images you turned down, with a line on why, leave much less room for guessing. The point about saved standards repeating a weak decision is worth repeating too. A Skill or a locked Style just makes whatever you saved consistent. If the rule was vague, you get consistent vagueness, which is harder to spot than the drift you started with.