Are the following statements correct (for SO only, I understand the numbers differ elsewhere):
- 3 rejections are required to reject an edit and remove it from the queue
- 3 approvals are required to approve an edit and remove it from the queue
- if the OP edits the post the pending suggested edit will be rejected by community, but the text of that edit may end up in the post anyway if the OP feels like keeping it (note 1)
- if a single reviewer clicks Improve their changes will end up in the post and the edit will be approved or rejected (by the reviewer? or by community?) based on the checkbox about being helpful with no further opportunity for robo-approvers to approve the original crap
note 1 - I don't think all these OPs are unchecking "edit was helpful" which is checked by default, but it's possible the accept/reject by community depends on that box. Possible, but doesn't match my observations.
If these are correct, could I not conclude that hitting Reject is a mug's game that leaves the suggested edit in the queue for robo-approvers, and the smart money clicks Improve and sets to work doing what needs to be done? That the only way to solve robo-approvers is to be willing to do the work, not just to say "not good enough" to a crappy suggestion?