In both cases, it isn't the OP who made the secondary edits you refer to, but another user who was reviewing your suggested edit.
Reviewers other than the OP must have 2000 reputation. At that level, users can make edits:
without having to undergo review,
without having to meet the character limit,
however, without the 2-rep reward.
The help officially ...
The edit suggestion obviously improved the post and should have been approved. I approved it and made some further changes. I also edited the answer slightly.
My take: it is always worthwhile to improve an old post that is not going to be deleted. The age of a post has no bearing on whether it should be edited or not.
The tour says:
we're working together ...
muru's answer is all true, but I just want to add some extra information, as the edits you linked are done by a user with the edit privilege.
And before answering your question, I want to explain how edits work first. There are 2 types of edits:
These are edits that can be done by anyone with the edit privilege. They don't need to be reviewed ...
I think the immediate need for this has passed but let's look at some data since we're here and I've been looking at data.
This is that graph Zanna mentioned in her answer. This is suggested edits per week from July 2019 until today:
I'm guessing that I'm looking at a slightly wider window that Zanna did because, while in the last year, there's been a ...
jokerdino pointed out some more data to me, and we noted that the number of suggested edits being made per day/week/month has actually been gradually declining at least since 2015 and is currently at a particularly low level. The fact that people are running into the queue size limit in these circumstances indicates that reviewing of the queue has declined ...
I think these additions are commentary on the question, and should be kept in the answer (Dan has already mentioned this apparent mistake in his answer) or in comments. People often do correct the question's premise in answers but editing the question itself is IMO not done unless the OP says it was a mistake.
If the OP confirms that they were using Juniper, ...
The suggested edit looked OK to me. Even though the suggested edit seems helpful the owner of the question rejected the edit for some unknown reason, and it is the privilege of the OP to do so for any reason.
I think this makes perfect sense. It should be enough to simply add another bullet point to the "Information needed when creating a question" section. Something like this:
Always mention the Ubuntu flavor you are using, its version (e.g. "20.04") and if you have changed the default graphical environment, mention what desktop manager you ...
Besides the managerial reasons stated by muru and Dan, I would also like to add a bit of technical reasoning.
Why are those edits allowed?
Because sometimes it's the details that make the difference.
I very specifically remember two weeks ago, when I was helping an owner of a small VPS setup a piece of software over Discord. To be honest the errors he was ...