Sometimes I edit others' questions or answers for minor things like readability and grammar. I have status on this site that lets me edit their content immediately, without my edits going into a queue.
However, some times, I'll find a post where a lower-statused user (who cannot directly edit posts, but must submit suggested edits that go into the edit queue) has already suggested edits. I discover this by clicking on the edit button, and instead of being prompted with the edit box allowing me to type my own edits, I am prompted with the other user's edit as if I was approving edits in the queue.
I often click the 'Approve' button for these edits, after reviewing them - since they often make the same changes I was about to make anyways. However, if the pending edit has no other votes, I get a message stating that the edit needs other review votes before it is applied. Further, I am not allowed to edit the post myself, because of the pending edit in the queue. So, basically, a user who has the ability to edit posts without review (me) is prevented from editing a post, or even approving an edit, without others' agreement.
I understand the concept of the edit queue, and also the concept of giving trusted users the ability to directly edit posts without review, but it seems like these two related functions were implemented without any coordination: Why give a user the ability to instantly edit a post themselves, but then not let them instantly approve others' edits? Further, why block that user from doing the edit themselves, even if a pending edit is in the queue?
Am I missing something? Or misunderstanding the intent of these features? It's not a big deal, it just strikes me as odd.