An option becomes the favourite (inevitably Tom Baker if this
site’s demographic is representative of the whole population).
I then go to the Tom Baker entry and change the name/content to John Bevan, winning the virtual admiration of the internet.
I suspect others would notice and correct it, but I can see some companies seeing this as an easy way to promote their products if safe guards are not put in place. If they’re in niche areas, such changes are more likely to go unnoticed.
Perhaps locking down a title after a certain amount of time, restricting who can edit such information, or requiring approval for edits to options which have received votes may be required?
I think I’m generally in favor of requiring approval (whether from moderators, or other contributors) after some number of votes.
Not requiring approval for small changes would make things a lot smoother, but I think we need to be careful not to relax the requirements too much, since even minor changes could potentially be used surreptitiously to discourage people from voting for an option. Even just removing all capitalization and punctuation could dramatically damage people’s perception of an option’s legitimacy.
On the other hand, if in the notifications for edits, we make title changes really clear, any major change late in an option’s life would probably get enough eyes on it to get it reverted quickly (or alternatively, get attention for edits that need approval).