People don't vote mechanically, making sure the question meets all the requirements on their checklist.
Such checklists are guidelines that help ask questions that are likely to be well received.
They are guidelines for writing, not for voting.
I upvote questions that I find interesting in some way — there are many ways to interest me.
If the question is badly written, it can rarely be interesting.
If I don't get the question, I can't be interested in it.
Satisfying the points on a checklist is an almost necessary condition, but certainly not sufficient.
Although the OP is the only one rewarded when the question is voted up, I recommend ignoring the fact that it may have been edited by someone else.
The main reason for scoring questions is to identify good or interesting ones.
Rewarding the asker by internet points is a means to this end.
If someone asks something polishable but not quite polished, it is still an achievement.
The rugged first version can earn negative votes, but the reward comes when someone polishes it.
I think it also works from the rewarding point of view, although I find that secondary.