@connor: +1 Thanks for the comment, thought it's unclear if you view my question as a dup, or related; if you view it as a dup, I'll just delete the question. Thanks!

Hey @blunders it looks like it's too late now. I didn't close it as a duplicate because I wasn't sure if you had a specific situation in mind that the other answer didn't cover

if it was just a general questions about the benefits of silicon valley, then I think it was a dup

@connor Yeah, decide it was a dup too - especially after seeing that you reopen the other question and made edits that appeared to be an attempt to make the question more open ended.

I thought of that question when I first saw yours. At the time it was asked we were still figuring out what kinds of questions were on topic. It didn't make the cut at the time, but I think it would be a valid question if asked now

Thinking about posting a question on meta about the pattern of edits you've been making to questions, but not sure how best to address the pattern. As such, I was wondering if you were able to cite any existing meta support edits like these? (Meaning edits to questions that have existing answers, and the edit appears to change the possible intent of the question.)

Heading out to see some demos & get some drinks - I'll be back in 12-24 hours... Cheers!

@blunders What is the etiquette for modifying posts?

Edits from other users shouldn't change the meaning of the post regardless if there's an answer

I guess I did make an exception with that silicon valley question. I rolled it back to the author's original question, before they tried to fix it and turn it into a too localized question

@eggyal More my personal opinion (and experience) that edits to questions are at the OP's option. The intent/meaning of the question should not change after an answer is posted. If the community requests edits, and the OP declines, the resolution is to close the question. (Again, my opinion.)

Okay, gotta go... later!

@blunders See Why can people edit my posts? How does editing work?

Edits for stuff like cleaning up grammar, formatting, tags, removing spam and offensive language etc shouldn't require the OP's permission. There are some grey areas though. Sometimes an editor may try to improve the clarity of the question, which should help the OP get answers. It's fine to make these edits. It's assumed that people who have those priviledges to make edits or review them will be careful enough.

If the editor did go too far though and the OP believes that the meaning was changed too much they can always rollback.

In general it's best to respect their wishes, but if you believe the case warrants mod intervention flag the post instead of starting an edit war

of course if they insist on their question being terrible it will just be closed

closing is likely the best course of action, but if a question may be useful to future visitors it's well within the community's rights (as eqqyal pointed out) to hijack the question and turn it into quality content for the site

I think the point is to stop viewing one's posts as one's own. There is no ownership of post content: every post belongs to the community. Irrespective of who first created the post, it thereafter is a community resource to be edited and improved as required.

that's true, but people are also looking for answers to questions. Ideally an answer to the modified question should work for the OP's original need