Revisiting: Holding a dose indefinitely: is there a documented downside?

The question in the title: Revisiting: Holding a dose indefinitely: is there a documented downside? I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it.

A question about technique rather than about dose.

I have been doing the same thing for 5 months and it works, and then I read one of the documentation pages here and realised I may have been reasoning from a misunderstanding the whole time. Nothing has gone wrong; I would just like to understand why it has not.

What I do, exactly, is described below. Please tell me which parts are load-bearing and which are superstition.

Two things before anyone answers the substance.

First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.

Stepping down deliberately: the withdrawal trials show that stopping is followed by regain. The step-down literature is thinner. The conservative assumption is that stepping down is followed by some regain, with the magnitude unknown.

Worth separating two things that post #19 runs together.

Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.