With anything like this, if it can be abused it will be abused. There is a significant difference between the author having an edit button to make changes as they see fit, vs. Vitor's idea of there being a mechanism for people other than the author to suggest edits and corrections that clients may display and implement in any manner of ways, especially considering that that mechanism defaults to "on" for everyone. In either case, I am against having edits on kind-1 notes, period. Basic replies accomplish everything that needs to accomplished here—simple corrections by the author and opinions from others.

I do see use cases for what Vitor is making, but I am fully against the way he's proposing/demonstrating its use case. Collaborative editing of documents, for example. This is not collaborative editing, though, and kind-1 notes are not designed to be full fledged documents. If it was collaborative in nature, then the author would explicitly define/invite who can suggest edits. This is turning your common everyday social media posts and replies into a weird amalgamation of Wikipedia, Twitter community notes, and fact checking. Yes the author must accept changes for the changes to show as authored by them, but that is not the only way this info can or will be used. If it can be abused, it will be abused.

There is a place for this feature, but that place is not on kind-1 notes.