My most recent idea to fix this is Amendments. "Each story should have a queue for Amendments; this would, to a large extent, replace Editorial comments, or at least the nit-picky ones. Users would submit them, and be allowed to edit the body of the story and post it as an Amendment." (more details and comments follow in the link)
I think this could work, provided no intellectual content is changed. As long as only broken links, spelling, grammar, typos, and maybe some formatting is fixed, then I'm fine with the idea. But it might be an overly complex mechanism, especially if there's a simple answer.
ucblockhead suggested a much simpler approach, namely that of allowing the author to fix the mistakes, and reset the votes on the story, but still keep it in the queue. To prevent clogging up the queue, we could also add an option for votes that aren't expired by a resubmission, but there are trade-offs involved in both cases. IMHO, this would give the author more control over the editing, but might be slower; I bet it would be easier to implement, though.
However, whatever way we do it, I hope we're agreed that this is a good thing? If you have any other ideas for how this might work, or would like to suggest changes to either model, please do so! There's no guarantee that any of this will get done, but if we come up with a truly great idea, I'm sure someone will implement it. :)
Thanks to Thad, Beh Tong, and Uncarved Blockhead for helping out with the story ideas!