A-to-I mRNA editing resembles A-to-G mutations. Functional mRNA editing, representing only a corner of total editing events, can be inferred from the experimental removal of editing. However, it is intuitive to ask why evolution chose RNA editing rather than directly (and simply) changing the genomic sequence to G? If G is better than A, then drift or constructive neutral evolution (CNE) theory can explain the emergence of such editing, but it is still unclear why the exemplified conserved editing is perfectly maintained without observing any subsequent A-to-G DNA mutations? Virtually every functional and conserved mRNA editing site faces this ultimate question until one justifies that being editable is better than a hardwired genomic allele. While the advantage of editability has been validated in fungi, this ultimate question has not been answered for any functional editing sites in animals. By providing several conceptual arguments and specific examples, we propose that proving the evolutionary adaptiveness of an editing site is far more difficult than revealing its function.