@R0b0t1 just a small thing, this is cooking Stack Exchange; StackOverflow is just the big programming site.

And I'm sort of confused about the large editing thing - are you saying you've seen problems with it it here and you want to know what the candidates would do about it, or is it just a hypothetical?

And for the rules question, do you mean rules with respect to editing, or just in general? For the general question, you might want to have a look at the candidates' questionnaire answers (linked in a pinned message) - questions 1, 2, 6, and 9 are pretty related to the general topic of rules and enforcement.

@R0b0t1 first, I'm sorry if you had an unpleasant experience with edits - and I hope it didn't happen here in Seasoned Advice, aka Cooking SE. In my experience, drastic edits are rare, the majority of edits deal with spelling and grammar errors, adjust formatting for better readibility and similar. The big ones fall in roughly three categories:

1. A (typically new) user added clarifying details either in an "answer" or as a comment, prompted or not, and from there, it becomes clear that they meant something different than what we read initially. At the same time they appear to have difficulties using the edit functionality and someone jumps in to help. After that, the question might look very different, but fits the asker's intention.

2. A user has difficulties phrasing the question in clear English. Ideally we are able to clarify all unclear bits via comments (see 1.), but sometimes we have to make a few guesses. This is risky, but the alternative would be to close as "unclear". We try to help to the best of our abilities, not blindly follow the rules.

3. A question is largely off-topic, but a user (note that editing is not a moderator privilege!) sees some parts that are salvageable so that the question becomes on topic, even if parts are removed or the focus shifted a bit. Yes, this might qualify as "not what the asker intended", but isn't a partial answer better than nothing? And yes, maybe the asker already knew that part (but I would have expected this in the question then), but other readers might still benefit.

There are two more aspects: All SE sites are not geared to serve just one particular user that has a question right now. We collect all those questions and answers and build a knowledge base, so that future readers can also benefit. Which is btw. something that we need to explain to new users when their questions are closed as duplicates: We don't dismiss their question, we already have answers ready for them.

And finally, if a user really disagrees with an edit, there's the handy rollback function, that allows them to choose the version they feel appropriate.

So @R0b0t1, to sum this all up, I'm fine with all three cases listed above, as long as they simply try to help. I encourage everyone that disagrees with an edit to speak up in comments and request clarification or flag a moderator.

We very, very, very rarely get "edit battles" with multiple edits, rollbacks and so forth. Those are often fuelled by users that have difficulties accepting a few basic SE principles, namely that everyone can suggest or perform an edit and that some topics are simply not on topic here. (And that if they disagree with a policy, the post is not the place for that discussion, that's what Meta is for.)

I have never observed an "edit into something different just because it's easier to answer" case.

@R0b0t1 I am in agreement with @Stephie's comments. We diligently try to maintain the integrity of questions and strive to preserve the original post as much as possible. In addition, through review actions, we try to ensure that any edits that harm the original post are rejected or rolled back. I can understand how the types of issues you describe can cause problems, but I think that they are more likely to be issues on a technical site than a cooking site.

@R0b0t1 The question to me is "Would you rather have a question that's open and helping people or would you rather have your question be closed?" If we ask for clarification and we get no response, it's fair for us to assume that the question's been left behind to some degree... but if the edited version of the question isn't what you intended to ask - you can ask a new question.

But keep in mind, not all subjects are on topic here. So if the question was edited because it failed to be on-topic or was too broad, we're trying to keep your question afloat, so keep that in mind. If your question doesn't have answers, you can always revert the edits.

Editing is one of the most important parts of SE. It really affects how a question is received. Minor edits make the post easier to read and more clearly worded, major edits are used (though they're rare) to "rescue" a question that might otherwise be closed. We want to answer your question but we need to understand that question first to be able to answer it. If edits change your question, tell us. Give us more information so that we can understand what you're actually asking.