I got an email saying how I was editing my answer to Why do we use Complex numbers and not other systems? a lot and bumping it to the front page. When we work together, we find that naturally, all the trains of thought with their ways of thinking rise like a tide. People are more likely to make a sacrifice in another their area work to improve things in a certain area when they get a returned favour in their area. This can lead to us forming a precisely focused mindset for getting things done and making it a habit to do what we need to do to get them done. I believe there is a little bit of a natural cost in having a system that systematically puts too much responsibility onto the rare and unusual. I think the cost is the same regardless of how rare they are. I was fine with my past feedback on my errors. I was like "I will sometimes make mistakes and eventually learn how to fix my error and making the rare and occasional error and eventually learn how to fix it." I think this responsibility is too much. When I have ideas on how I could do things later, they are just seeds. I don't expect myself to use them in their current form later and expect myself to later provide improvisation on them and do things my own way based on them. I don't consider it my present self's job to be a perfect master of my future. I think of changes to make to my answer. Mathematics Stack Exchange is handing me the responsibility to be a perfect master of its front page with my edits. That is too much for me. In high school, if somebody else does your homework for you, you get a zero. They are being like "How come almost everybody else can do it?" and that would be getting me making decision by which trains of thought have the strongest muscles. Why can't Mathematics Stack Exchange make it a habit to do their own homework and have the content on their front page be the end result of a month long process of working together to decide what it should be in the month proceeding it and providing a lot of improvisation to the seeds produced a month before, so that they don't have to systematically put too much responsibility onto the rare and unusual people or moments of people. It is like having to interpret the music at 500% speed in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SvdVUbHazY for me. I was able to follow it up to 300% speed. If you are in the sleepy state and they hand you the responsibility of a normal alert person to pull off tasks that are too advanced, it will be like that. The 300% speed music and the 500% speed music don't even differ by a factor of 2. When people play in Chess tournaments with 10 second increments, they just worry about having a strategy that can beat simple enough strategies. When you watch 2 players in a tournament with a rating much higher than yours, you can't see at all why the moves they're making are good moves for them and the game just looks like random bits. A bad move for a lower level player can be a good move for a higher level player. I think I cannot meet Mathematics Stack Exchange's expectations to do so much. What am I supposed to do? I think Mathematics Stack Exchange is systematically putting too much responsibility onto those moments of people that it's too much for. It really is. The real world is like a rated Chess tournament but with a little difference. People are supposed to play that well against a person who actually wants to challenge and compete and take on that big a challenge. They are not supposed to play that well against a weakling and totally destroy them and make it like having to follow the music at 500% speed in the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SvdVUbHazY for them, and are supposed to lower themselves to that level when playing against them. In Japan, it's rude to give a tip because it's rating them on their performance and they consider themselves to be performing at 100%. I guess they feel like they've formed a simple plan with a whole picture and it's working and they consider it 100% and feel like they don't need people making more part of the problem that isn't. Maybe they feel like tips just open up a can of worms. I don't have the wisdom of the crowd so the following is just a seed towards a plan 100 years from now and is not a call for other people to just follow it in its current form now: I think we could have a rule similar to that rule in Japan. No more people making something part of the problem that isn't. Let's make it easier and make nothing at all other than the specific task of each small local environment part of the problem concerning that small local environment. They will be separate independent environments each of which manages itself. Once they get the specific task done, it is 100%. I once heard a speech on TV of American politicians saying "Our differences are what strengthen us." It must be soething like this. 2 people have twice the computation power of 1. Theoretically, it would be possible for them to pull off a task together that's too much for either one of them alone and what's like the music at 300% speed for the 2 of them working together would be like the music at 500% speed for either one of them alone. The 300% speed and the 500% speed don't even differ by a factor of 2. I guess when they want to be really precise, constantly deciding who to give the job to by working together is the only way. It could very well happen in 100 years that Mathematics Stack Exchange just gets fired from a certain job by their boss, who decides to give it to somebody else who gets it done in a really precise way by their standards.
My response to what seems to be your question, "Why should I not edit my answer so many times?"
Editing a question bumps it back to the front page, as I am sure you are aware. Making so many edits to old answers doesn't really do much to help improve the overall quality of the site. I don't have the ability to see what exactly the answer in question is, but it might be an inconvenience to others to see the same answer being brought up repeatedly (I say "might" because I suppose they can just ignore it).
Some editing to correct typos or mathematical mistakes is fine. But at some point, the answer should be about done, usually about 3-4 edits, and in some extreme cases 10 edits. I'm not saying that's what you did; in fact, I don't have the ability to see what the edited answer in question is. I'm just sharing my opinion. Rarely there is an answer which is edited many times and each edit adds new information, bibliographies, and citations.
If you want to work on a complete and detailed answer, do it in advance rather than during the post itself. I've learned this from working hours on some of my answers before posting them and finding several mistakes in my scratch notes. Or you can use the sandbox.