I don't have time to update anything at the moment, but based on Council discussion a moment ago, I think the intention is that when authors are pinged for feedback on Experimental changes that council@ or standards@ (standards@ is better in my view) are also copied so there's visibility.
So we should probably update the procedure doc.
Actually, maybe I do have time. I'll see if I can sort that quickly.
Another problem is that a lot of feedback happens out of band. As someone who has done this myself multiple times because it seems easier and faster - and often actually is easier because you can talk to a colleague in a more direct manner then saying this publicly on list - it can be a problem
(nothing that the editor team can figure out of course)
I don't see discussions out of band as a problem, as long as the important things happen on list.
Maybe important is the wrong word there. Gatekeeping and/or procedural, possibly.
Maybe the editor message should ask the author to at least ack on list?
jonas': Is there a practical reason I shouldn't push this doc-only update directly to master without a PR?
Did so, so I guess we'll see if anything goes boom.