I don't know if this can be changed specifically for the Bitcoin Stack Exchange site, or whether it needs to be changed for Stack Exchange as a whole. Even if there is individual site fine grained control over this, I don't know if Bitcoin can have this changed while still in beta. I'm interested in hearing people's reasons for and against this policy, and whether there are ways of overriding it in specific instances such as the example I give below.
I've just suggested an edit to an answer which only required a single digit number to be changed from 2 to 3. In most cases a single character edit would be trivial and would not affect understanding of the answer, so editing would be discouraged. However, in this case the answer's example scenario already included a valid amount of 2BTC and another valid amount of 3BTC, so the typo accidentally referred to the other amount and gave a completely different impression of what was going on. The fact that 3BTC was intended and that 2BTC is just a typo would be obvious to someone who understands how transactions work, but the answer is explaining for the benefit of people who do not yet understand how transactions work, so the correction of the typo is essential.
Due to the automated ban of edits of less than 6 characters, I've had to go in and make other trivial edits in order to bring the total up to 6 characters. This is increasing the number of trivial edits being made and taking time away from useful changes that could be made elsewhere. I also expect that some people feel discouraged from contributing to the editing process. I'd like to hear from anyone who is.
I understand that it is useful to have methods to discourage trivial edits, but I do not believe that the importance of an edit can be judged based only on its length. Rather than an automated rejection, could there be an automated message that says
"This edit is likely to be rejected due to being less than 6 characters. Do you want to make further changes? Click here to submit anyway if you are certain it is not trivial"