I hope it's mostly tolerated - I for one am often guilty of multi-edits. Yes, missed a comma there, gotta. Oh, no, their vs they're, gotta...
Which is btw a good reason not to be overly fixated on grammar.
But, yes, sometimes a question needs a lot of restructuring and/or taking into account comments before it is done.
This reads like an opinion, but a more direct answer is that I only once saw someone called out for edits, on StackOverflow. They were clearly gaming the bump-ups coming from edits - they were a brand new user and thought it was a nifty trick:
- edit 1. "This is good."
- edit 2. "This is very good."
- edit 3. "This is good."
- edit 4. "This is very good."
The mod called them out on it, they apologized and stopped doing it. No great harm done, hopefully they didn't get discouraged from posting there (their question was reasonable enough).
If you have good reasons to edit, do so. If you are repeat editing to bump up in question list, don't. If you can do a number of edits at the same time, i.e. look through all the grammar fixes at once, good idea too.
And, oh, yes, as per Uhoh, don't shift the goal posts on the question overmuch. If you ask question X, then get an answer and then edit the question to the point where the answer doesn't seem to match the question which now looks like question Y, that can be a bit of a problem. If so, and if you really, really, have to restructure that much, consider adding a small footnote acknowledging that you've changed the question around a bit on the answerers.
For example, let's assume you are asking about agricultural subsidies. You do so and then you narrow it down to the subsidies for only California (possibly by just adding
California tag), after you get some answers for other places like Europe: not great. Or "I am only asking about subsidies at the federal level", after you've had state-level answers.
Not saying you did this on your question, just giving examples of what seem to be inherently problematic edits.