[dang]

Editing a comment after the fact in a way that deprives a reply of its original context and makes it look stupid is, in most cases, a dick move. I think most users understand that. It doesn't make a difference whether the reply was by a moderator or not.

[Tao332]

- Accusing a user of using a slur

- Getting snarky because they did the reasonable thing and got rid of the slur after it was pointed out

- Calling said user a dick. If Karen is a misogynistic slur, How is dick not moreso misandristic? I realize you said "dick move", but that's functionally the same. Saying something was a "c?nt move" or a "n????r move" would be tantamount to calling someone a c?nt or n????r.

- Because maybe it made your comment "look stupid"

Jawdropping desecration of the guidelines. You need a vacation.

[bell-cot]

It would be nice if there was a way to display text in a strikethrough font.

Though, in this specific context, appending something like "Edit: 's/Karens/vigilantes/g'" would be the unambiguous way to document the edit.

[EddieDante]

In most of the spaces I frequent, an edit to change objectionable wording after being called on it is acceptable. Since you've made it plain that that sort of approach doesn't work here, I'll keep that in mind.

[dang]

Thanks!