I recently posted an answer that included an image of text. This answer was repeatedly edited to remove that image, which I repeatedly restored to the answer. Dale M tells me that the Law Stack Exchange has a policy of not allowing pictures of text.
Where are these policies promulgated? I don't see any help on this point at the Help Center.
And is there a "meta" exchange such as many other stack exchanges have, to keep a question like this one (about the policies of the exchange itself) out of the way of the substantive discussions?
PART 2: WHERE THINGS STAND
Rick was one of the original participants in deleting my image, and now he has sent me a link to the Meta site. I still have not found any indication of the supposed policy against images of text. There is a question at the Meta site (also flagged by Rick) about whether we should have such a policy. That question (like this question) also mentions the efforts of Dale M, and the question seems to suggest that we do not actually have this policy.
It seems to me that to the contrary, there are one or two zealous members of the exchange imposing this personal enthusiasm on the exchange by down-voting, editing or deleting disobedient contributions.
Should it work that way?
Dale M, seeming lone champion of this supposed rule, has answered as follows: It is not a Law Stack Exchange policy; it is a Stack Exchange policy. It will be enforced here and, I trust, on all other sites.
But that link in the words "Stack Exchange" goes not to a statement of the rules by the Stack Exchange, but to a conversation on another stack exchange, Stack Overflow. I'm not clear how that is an answer to my question.
Taryn's answer there does not say (as Dale says) that the Stack Exchange forbids images of text; rather it says that under some circumstances a user uploading an image will receive an automatic message that says, "Images and screenshots can be a nice addition to a post, but please make sure the post is still clear and useful without them. " I did not receive that message, perhaps because the policy is not in fact a Stack Exchange policy but the policy of that other exchange. My post was still clear and useful without the image, so, as far as I can tell the objection still may be merely Dale's preference.
So as a procedural matter, is there any way for a user to know the policies of the Stack Exchange directly, not in remarks written to him in particular but in some published statement of the rules?
Or, failing that, what should happen if someone repeatedly removes an image from my post for reasons that cannot really be explained?
It's been 8 hours since Dale M last asserted the rule here, and nobody seems to know about this rule except for him. I guess that if 24 hours pass with no evidence of the rule except for Dale's assertions, I'm going to "roll back" those edits to re-include the image and see what happens next. Perhaps the question will then become whether the Stack Exchange offers any remedy where a user assumes emergency powers.