Apologies if this has already been asked:
Is it considered acceptable for a user to review suggested edits to their own question?
I ask this because I've had two seemingly reasonable (to me) edits to a question title rejected by the user who posted the question.
The question is "Where does the word “sh**” come from?", posted by tchrist.
My first edit was to replace "sh**" in the title with "shag". This seemed reasonable to me because I didn't feel that shag was such an offensive word that it needed to be censored in the title. Also, I felt there was the potential for the censored word to be misread as shit. This was rejected by tchrist, saying "This edit is incorrect or an attempt to reply to or comment on the existing post". I took this to mean that whether the word shag is offensive is a subject for discussion rather than a unilateral edit, and I have no problem with that call.
My second edit was to replace "shag" with "sh*g", preserving the censorship but removing the ambiguity. This was also rejected by tchrist for the same reason.
The reason I've asked this question is that it appears that tchrist is "marking his own homework" by moderating changes to his own question. This seems to go against the spirit of peer review, which is the whole point of having suggested edits in the first place. It also seems slightly unfair to allow this practice, because users without review privileges do not get the opportunity to moderate changes to their own questions.
As an aside, without wishing to get personal, it does seem inconsistent on tchrist's part to insist on censoring the word shag when the words jism, quim, minge and wankers all appear uncensored in his other questions.
EDIT: I've tried not to sound whiny here, apologies if this comes across that way. I'm genuinely interested to know if this is acceptable.