First Scenario: Edits so Upvotes can be Changed to Downvotes
Recently I found an interesting occurrence when going to re-edit one of my answers. One of my answers were edited by a person, so they could un-upvote it and then down-vote it.
I assume it was to gain some kind of strategic advantage on the question, as one cannot normally change their votes after 25 minutes, so by putting in a small edit, the vote can be changed.
Second Scenario: Opposing Example
On the other hand, this allows us to change downvotes to upvotes when question frames change or we make small adjustments to answers: After a small edit, I felt that it clarified the answer enough that the downvote was no longer necessary. In fact, combined with a frame change on the question, their answer was now one of the best. Following this edit, I changed my vote from a downvote to an upvote.
I believe the intended reason for being unable to change a vote unless an edit is made, is for when a fix or change is made, and an answer/question is improved enough to warrant a change from a downvote to an upvote (similar to the second scenario).
By allowing re-votes after a personal edit, one can do the second scenario, making the necessary change oneself and revert their vote from a downvote when the answer has been improved, or the question frame has changed. At the same time, however, it enables the first scenario, where someone can edit another's answer to change their votes strategically.
Is this first scenario sufficiently offset by the second to justify allowing votes to be recast after personal edits? Curious about advice/opinions from other users.