I noticed this old post has been edited to include a lengthy update to the original question.
To me, this seems like a slight missuse of the platform which is supposed to be a Q&A site, not a forum. This feels more like a blog post with an excessive amount of unecessary information that doesn't contribute towards helping a user understand the original question.
Should it be rolled back?
General answer: I agree. We definitely allow / encourage question-askers to post updates after the question text, but such updates should be concise and high-level. Personally, I also don't approve of multiple updates: there should be one update paragraph that describes all the updates, not a long series of incremental updates.
Question askers are also allowed to post answers to their own questions. In some cases, these can effectively be updates: "I tried X and the result was Y." In such cases, length is less of a concern. But these must be legitimate answers to the original question; only answers go in the answer box.
Should it be rolled back?
I would recommend leaving a comment suggesting that updates should not be so long, and inviting the OP to shorten their update. You could even link this meta discussion. If you have the inclination, you could even attempt editing it yourself. If you do all of this and the OP does not cooperate, you could then flag for moderator intervention.
Specific Answer: I have left a comment directing the OP to shorten their update. If they don't do so within a day or so, I (or anyone) will do it for them. In the latter case, the shortening would be a moderation action (i.e., they should not roll it back to the long version), but the specific edits would be a suggestion (i.e., they can choose to write a different short version if they prefer).
