I am not sure if the peer reviewer understood the question, and then my answer. If these are the reviewers, then this document : Stack* based developrs write more vulnerable code than others ! is very much valid !! ??
I vote to reject your edit for two reasons:
- the first part of your edit doesn’t add any substantive content, it’s a variation on the existing
last -x | lesscommand and an example;
- the second part of your edit is incorrect: the X server error message doesn’t give any clue regarding the reason of the shutdown.
I’m not saying the post you edited can’t be improved; in particular, the link at the end isn’t useful, and should either be expanded upon or removed IMO. However there are other answers to the question which provide similar information.
Even if your edit is correct, if it fundamentally changes the answer it should not be an edit but a new answer.
Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. Common reasons for edits include:
- To fix grammar and spelling mistakes
- To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)
- To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place
- To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages
- To add related resources or hyperlinks