This question provoked a hail of downvotes and a rapid close. It looks to me as if people mistook Chinese characters in pathnames for Chinese error messsages. Furthermore, there was an almost-answerable question in there, dealing with iPhone SDK tools. So complaining of the lack of code was missing the poor OP's point. Couldn't this have been left open for, oh, 15 minutes and the OP given a fair chance to fix it up?
Rep being uninteresting on Meta, I'll just edit here and who cares if CW goes off.
Reading the answers, I would summarize under several headings.
- Close is not a kiss-of-death. Posters of closed questions are welcome to edit and expect a reopening.
- Just because one of the comments was confused about Chinese chars, that doesn't mean that all or any of the close voters were confused.
- There is still some divergence of opinion as to how rapidly defective questions should be closed, versus allowed to stay open in the hopes of a repair. That's not surprising.
For myself, I'd add the following thoughts.
- To us non- (not-yet-???) moderators, the close process is a bit opaque. As with some other rep-based activities, it's sometimes best to just trust that them with the rep haven't been replaced by Wikipedia editors and not worry too much. Still, it's hard not to feel some sympathy for the OP in a case like this.
- I see plenty of questions that are just as incoherent as this one -- once you read them carefully -- but which aren't closed. Rather than railing about some notion of unfairness, I theorize that people with close votes shoot at things that are obviously defective, but can't be expected to read a Java code posting in detail and discover that it's entirely incoherent.