Note: Some of this issue is covered by this post, but I want to discuss this from a different viewpoint.
The main question is: What should happen if the person who suggested an edit, edits the same post again (maybe differently) after it has got review votes, but the review haven't got completed yet?
This question was inspired by a scenario that has just happened to me:
I've suggested an edit to the ecmascript-2020tag wiki excerpt.
ECMAScript 2020 (ES2020) is the 11th version of the ECMAScript language. It adds many important new features, including dynamic imports, globalThis, optional chaining, arbitrary precision BigInts and Promise.allSettled.
Later, I noticed that the review has got a Reject vote, because it didn't explain how the tag should be used.
As I agree with that vote, I've quickly fixed it by editing it again, adding the following sentence:
Only use this tag where the question specifically relates to new features or technical changes provided in ECMAScript 2020.
However, I noticed that this suggestion didn't get a new review entry, but just updates the original.
Note: This question isn't about me personally, or about that my edit has got a Reject vote. This info is just for context.
Note: My question doesn't only apply to tag wiki edits, but to regular edits too.
I think that this can lead to several problems:
Incorrectly rejected or approved edits
There's a greater chance for that edit to be handled in the way as the first vote (as only 1 more of that completes the review, while it takes 2 against-votes to complete it in the different way)
Responsibility issues
In a such case, the second reviewer can single-handedly complete the review by agreeing the first vote. Therefore, they will be the only one responsible for reviewing (or, possibly, mis-reviewing) the edit, but nothing (except the timestamps) indicates that.
Moderation issues
The user who cast the first vote isn't notified about the change, and cannot retract or change their vote.
What should happen in this case?
In my opinion, in this case, the original review entry should be put into a sort-of "disputed" state (like flags), and a new review entry should be put into the review queue. What do you think about that?
