The issue of unnecessary edits has been brought up many times here, both on meta and in chat.
The "Hidden points of editing you probably didn't know" post puts it fairly succinctly:
In any event, do not edit lots of old or low-quality posts at the same time so as to flood the main page with old stuff and hide newer content.
And as ever, M.A.R. has some words of wisdom:
Oh +1000 for this! I see much editor and reviewer time here on Chem that could be spent on something better.
Two examples of the kind of edit I'm talking about. One (the top image) is a relatively recent question, so I can see the logic in editing.
The other, however, is a post from 2014 which wasn't particularly interesting/well received and certainly didn't need to be resurrected merely to change the spelling of sulfuric (although sulphuric may be depreciated, its widely found in the UK and other parts of Europe, and google is perfectly capable of finding both spellings from the same search).
Similarly, I've seen years old posts edited to insert punctuation marks and change words as a matter of personal style/preference. In addition to this bumping posts to the homepage, theres also the issue of the fact that american english and style is not the de-facto standard here, and so long as the sentence makes sense and is readable I see no justification for editing other peoples personal styles of writing.
I wonder whether, as per the fact that posts/comments have to have a certain length, the system could be modified to prevent users from making minimal edits (a couple of characters), without the edits ending up in the queue before being bumped to the homepage.