Regarding Story Point Estimation, the instruction provided live seems to conflict with the other learning content so some clarification would be appreciated. An example was provided where two user stories were being considered (i.e. implementation of a credit card as a payment method). In the live class, it was stated that because one story (or credit card) had been implemented already, then the second should be reduced in estimation due to the learning already achieved, and the possibility of reuse of some of the code. In video based content however, instruction seemed to be that story point estimation needs to be independent of other stories… and estimations should focus on the effort that specific story requires independently of other stories. (an example of two "similar" stories was provided in the same manner as the credit card example) In the second approach, the end result is the VELOCITY of the team may increase as time passes, reflecting the learning that has occurred and other improvements in efficiency… but we do NOT scale the story point estimation based on status of other stories. That is… two stories of independent and equal inherent effort should be estimated the same, with efficiencies potentially visible in improving velocity, but evening out over time for a velocity that will reflect that some stories have built in efficiencies from others. This "independent" treatment of story point estimation seems crucial to the validity of the velocity measure contributing to planning being more accurate over time. Given that this seems a critical point to me, with user stories and their estimation a foundational element of agile, can someone please provide a clear and unambiguous description of best practice in this regard?