I was rather surprised to see this question closed: Viability of Open Source Business Model. It seemed directly related to the career of programming, as well as more interesting notions such as the nature of open source and the way open source code is developed. While not dealing with actual code, I (and many others, judging by the votes and responses) thought it was a genuinely useful and insightful question. A number of similar questions have been asked before without closure (I'm not going to list them here, as I don't particularly want them closed).
Since I am powerless to vote to reopen, I'd at least like to hear the reasoning behind this close decision (Shog9, I'm looking at you). To pre-empt the usual responses: I realise that each individual gets to make their own voting decisions, the community will shall triumph, etc. etc, but that doesn't change the fact that there should be broad standards on what the difference is between an acceptable and an unacceptable question, to aid both askers and the answerers who put time and effort in. What are the perceived benefits of closing such a question? This closure, in my opinion, was a clear mistake.
Full disclosure: this one is particularly annoying to me since I spent several hours writing a long summarising response, as an experiment in answer aggregation after the comments on meta yesterday. Even were that not the case, I don't understand this.