Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe SO needs to revisit its policy concerning how moderators can act. In the past few months I've noticed that nearly half of the very useful, very relevant questions I've come across via Google search have been closed for being "irrelevant," "not constructive," etc., etc.
Here's a question for you: if a question is closed for being "Not constructive," then why do so many people find it in Google and flock to it for answers?
Here's an excellent example: Cross-browser jquery ajax history with window.history.pushState and fallback
A very useful, well-constructed question with a couple great answers and excellent examples that I'll be using once I'm done with this rant. Yet it is closed as "not constructive."
How is a question that deals with exactly the problem I'm trying to solve today, and has answers that have exposed me to techniques I wasn't aware of, "not constructive"?
I asked that question previous to being aware that ServerFault existed. Now, aware that any questions about infrastructure should be posted to SeverFault, I can see why this question is 'off-topic' for SO. But, rather than move the question to SF, or even post a comment about the correct course of action, it's closed with no useful explanation.
This doesn't prevent the question from being found via Google though, which makes me wonder what the point of 'closing' questions is in the first place, it simply sends an ambigous message to the OP that they've done something 'off-topic'.
Perhaps that problem isn't so much zealotry amongst the ranks of the mods as much as the moderation procedure, as it currently exists, is not constructive due to the fact that it provides no useful error messages.