I would argue that for the majority paragraphs as well as short sentences almost always make it easier to read like in this suggested change. But the change was rejected for the following reason: "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."
I would agree with this rejection. You missed a grammatical mistake, which you actually introduced by the way, that by itself would be reasons to improve your edit as a reviewer.
I have a situation where a drive letter changed, without going into detail I have reason not to try and change it back.
should have been
I have a situation where a drive letter changed, without going into detail I have a reason not to try and change it back.
You otherwise only introduced 2 other improvements to the question.
"Shortcut find and replace"
This does not provide not a significant improvement to the clarity of the question. It does not make it easier to understand the question, and is a superficial change, to a question that needed significant improvements.
But alas, it seems I have to tackle my symlinks one at a time. This is tedious.
It is extremely difficult, to start a sentence with a conjunction and do so, in a correct manner. The original sentence was actually grammatically correct, so it should have been left alone, and changes like this should be avoided. You should compare the current revision to the revision you proposed. It is clear, what the author is asking, in the current revision. That really isn't that case, in your proposed edit, or the original revision of the question