Re-Edits of the official films are fun and a good exercise for the burgeoning editor.
I don't appreciate re-editing of fan films as those are the unique vision of the creators, good or bad, and deserve to stand as they are - with the exception of Directors cuts, which I've done of my early episodes. The difference here is that in one case, I tightened up an edit and in another, edited it to my original vision of the piece in question.
I did this as an example of how far you could take a re-edit about, oh, 12 years ago? Been editing my own stuff ever since. But this was a fantastic way of learning how it all worked.
Why the difference between "official" films and "fan" films?
The official films, made by Paramount, usually have tons of things fans can't get past and are often frustrated by. Take for example the 70+ deck turbolift in Star Trek V. Things like that are just slaps in the face to fans. Other examples include the death of Data, Kirk, Spock's half brother, Valaris instead of Saavik (that one really chaps my ass). And don't get me started on the JJ bastardizations. In the end, these films are not made as "gifts" to the fans. They're made to make money.
A fan film is created with love and a personal understanding of Star Trek, which is frankly different for everyone. Fan films are the personal vision of the group involved and whether you like them or not, and since they are provided to you free to watch, I feel re-editing a fan film is off the table. I can't bash or critique any fan film. I can only applaud the fact that someone got off their ass and made their own version of Star Trek. I respect that. I don't respect the studio system.