I posted an admittedly subjective (opinion gathering) question which was ultimately closed.
Here, I was wrong:
Okay. What is the history behind this feature? Searching Meta Stack Overflow I find conflicting and inconsistent statements, that indicate to me that the fine people behind Stack Overflow have experimented with both anonymous and non-anonymous close voting.
But still, if there are multiple peer close votes, anonymous ones, how do I learn anything if nobody bothers to suggest that in future, I should avoid asking questions like "X", if I don't want to get closed down. In short, close voters who do so anonymously seem like unhelpful, anonymous cowards. Afraid of retaliation? Okay, I understand that sometimes you need to vote to close and run away. There needs to be away to avoid retaliatory feedback loops that destroy the value of the questions on the site, or add human emotional noise. Maybe I could suggest some general close-vote tags.
but here I think I still have an answerable meta-question:
Is tagging your own question "subjective" initially, not enough to prevent close votes? Or do a lot of people think subjective questions are always argumentative, and should therefore never be on SO?
Answer: No. Subjective==argumentative is the prerogative of the 3K+ rep users. Accepted, and understood.