The common objection to allowing story editing is that later comments (especially objections) may lose their context. For instance, a comment saying "the claim in the third paragraph needs more supporting evidence" may become irrelevant if the author adds the evidence (or adds another paragraph before the third one).
My suggestion is to allow story authors to submit their stories in a non-final "draft" status. Drafts would be clearly marked as such (and could be displayed separately on the moderation page). While the story is in draft status, the author should be able to edit it freely in response to comments. (Perhaps only editorial comments should be allowed while the article is a draft?)
The main advantage of a special draft status (vs. simply allowing arbitrary editing by the author) is that others would know when the story is final, and vote or post comments based on the status. Many current -1 comments are because of easily-fixable flaws. With drafts, these comments could become suggestions for improvement (to gain a +1), or warnings of -1 votes (if fixes are not made).
The author of a draft could choose to withdraw the draft version or submit it as a final version at any time. Authors who wish to skip the draft process could do so by immediately approving their initial draft.
Voting could remain mostly the same. A truly bad draft (or inappropriate content) could still be removed by enough negative votes. A draft with a large positive vote probably shouldn't be posted until/unless the author approves a final version. (This could be abused, but it seems unlikely.) Alternately, the vote could be reset when the final version is submitted.
In most cases it should take less than 24 hours for a draft to be throroughly reviewed, spelling/grammar-checked, and otherwise corrected. I think this (optional) small delay would greatly improve many stories. Think of it as a community-wide "Preview" function. --Cliff
[ Parent ]