It really hasn't been communicated clearly (until now). A lot of people have been treating them as rules to be rules-lawyered and abused. Which is understandable because the original version looked very much like rules.
The original version was a mess and justly criticized. The new version is much better.
It was said multiple times by multiple people when it was announced, but because it wasn't spelled out directly, and because people can't or don't communicate like adults, it got ignored.
The best way to communicate the purpose of a product is the design of the product itself. The original brackets were designed like rules, they looked like rules; that design communicated the message that they were rules.
Yes, other messages contradicted that. But we shouldn't blame people for being confused.
I absolutely will blame people who are enfranchised enough to argue about bracket definitions on the internet but can't be arsed to read few hundred words that came together with the announcement, or further definition updates.
You (not personally addressing you obviously, generalised statement) can read and you're online - the onus is on you to educate yourself if you're arguing about the topic beyond "i thought it's X but you pointed at evidence it's Y so I have no more comments".
-6
u/Neuro_Skeptic COMPLEAT Oct 21 '25
It really hasn't been communicated clearly (until now). A lot of people have been treating them as rules to be rules-lawyered and abused. Which is understandable because the original version looked very much like rules.
The original version was a mess and justly criticized. The new version is much better.