I have used stackoverflow and I love it. I see one area that needs improvement - the process of closing questions.
I have had two questions closed the same way, even though there were people who found the questions useful and were actively participating in exchanging ideas. But let me share an example that drove me to write about this issue. Anybody who has struggled with Facebook's documentation and subtle flavors of integration options, will agree that the question below has merit:
However, the question was struck out with a very vague explanation about it being "localized to a geography" and "not likely to help future visitors". I frankly don't buy that because I am in the USA and I have seen variations of this problem.
I understand the need for peer review and I appreciate the role that forum watchers play. And, I know that the appeals process can be tedious to manage. I propose that people's closing votes be open to rating up-votes/downgrades by others (not the person who asked the question). Ratings should give people some power but let's have a counter check that allows other highly rated people to voice their opinion by voting on the close verdict.
What do you think? Do you agree that we should put in some accountability for people watching the forums will allow new people to participate without having to conform to the established way of thinking? Do you think we should subject close votes to up/down votes like all other questions and answers are?
PS: I will put this in a feature request if enough people agree with what I have proposed.