I'm referring to this edit: https://superuser.com/review/suggested-edits/774829
I'm almost afraid to ask (because I already asked in regards to other edits), but I'm still trying to learn, so I summon the courage and ask: What's the reasoning behind the two votes to reject the edit?
The "standard"-explanation suggest the following: This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability.
In my view my edit makes it (at least) easier to understand: The first sentence "I did not pay attention to this when mounting the drive as writable:" is very broad. It's not clear what the author means by "drive" (in this case it is an image or "virtual drive"), how he mounted it or what he means by "writeable". It's not clear what the following error message means (the screen shot) and where it's coming from as well as how to understand the next paragraph. So you need to get to the third paragraph to understand the first two. By adding the context (e.g. that the error message comes from vmware) it all becomes clear in the very beginning, thus understanding it right away, thus makes it easier to read.
To finish up the assessment of my own post, I don't see how my edit is "completely superfluous" or "harms readability". Also one reviewer accepted my edit.
So assuming I'm not right, what am I missing?