I'm one of the users on Stack Overflow that close votes a lot of questions, mainly by handling reviews that appear in the Close Vote Queue. As I have been doing that for a while now I have become pretty effective.
If you're looking at the Stack Exchange Network, the site model is clear: high quality questions and answers. That is all; nothing more nothing less. It's all about quality, and not just quality; high quality.
That characteristic of the posts found on the various sites attracts a lot of users, on Stack Overflow maybe more than we can handle. Those users recognize that the SE sites and communities are different from other sites found around the internet, but they sometimes fail to understand the reason why the SE sites come first in Google searches.
And that is where the quality mechanisms meet the posts, and that affects new users more than the more seasoned members of each community. If we forget the values expressed in the Help Center and the quality filters present, posts are moderated by the community with various tools. Close voting/flagging is one of them, down- (or up-) voting is another one among leaving comments.
I moderate posts, not people. For me, it doesn't matter if you're low rep or high rep. The point is that I try to signal as quickly as possible to the community and the OP that the post needs attention.
Your feature request seems to focus on reducing the speed in which this moderation can take place. As I said in a comment, in ideal settings, I make very quick decisions on posts. That is not something I should be punished for; I feel that it is needed for the posts to keep up with our quality standards, the same ones that attracted you to the SE sites. Waiting too long will do more harm. I might even propose a counter feature request: any user with the privileges that views a low quality, in need of moderation posts, and does nothing should be flagged.
I leave no comments when I cast a close vote for the following reason: if the post gets closed, the system adds a notice explaining what is wrong and needs to be improved. My close vote, however, might be wrong. If I leave a comment, more users will notice and follow my vote instead of making their own moderation judgment. Requiring comments is not wise (and based on your rule, I would have been suspended a long time ago).
If you receive comments, they are meant for you to get clarification about your post (yes, again, it is not about you at all; we are not a social-network). What is perfectly clear for you might be confusing for others. Almost all users are here to help. However, if you find comments berating you or that are inappropriate, either say so in a comment or flag the comment so a moderator can help out.
I understand it is not a great experience if you feel mistreated. The feature requests you are proposing will not help, I'm afraid, in raising the post quality for new users. In some cases, I might even see how it could hurt new users. I leave a down-vote on your feature request to convey that message.
In your latest edit, you propose to increase the number of close voters needed to close a question. Just remember that it is not a dead-end if a question is closed. If you edit and improve it, as indicated by the given close reason, your question will go to the re-open queue, where it can be re-opened with five votes. Keeping questions that need work from the OP open for too long is not advertising correct behavior to the OP, and might give other visitors the idea that they can ask similar questions (in quality, that is), as well.
Nevertheless, I hope you will reconsider, and give yourself and the communities here a little bit more time to get used to each other. We are different, that is basically it.