On Stack Exchanges, all users with 3,000 reputation or more can cast votes to close questions that they see as off-topic, or to reopen questions that they feel were wrongly closed. Ordinary users get a regular-strength close/reopen vote, 5 of which are necessary to close or reopen a question. In contrast, moderator close/reopen votes are an extra-strength variety, with just a single mod vote being sufficient to insta-close-or-reopen a question. All fine and dandy so far, as mods need to be able to nuke really-bad questions, or revive wrongly-closed ones, on occasion, but the mods don't have the ability to cast a normal-strength close/reopen vote in circumstances not requiring the use of the extra-strength vote.
Nearly eleven years ago, it was proposed to give mods the ability to "take off their mod hat" (so to speak) and cast a normal-strength close or reopen vote. The response was overwhelmingly "this is an amazing idea, why don't we have this already, this should be implemented ASAP" (lightly paraphrased), but it was unilaterally declined by @JeffAtwood in defiance of community consensus, claiming that mods should always use the bluntest instruments available to them (despite this [a] ignoring the fact that mods are users first and moderators second, and [b] being a clear violation of the principle of least privilege).
Since then, the ability for mods to cast a regular-strength close/reopen vote (or something with an even gentler touch) has been proposed again and again, as has a workaround to the problem,1 yet nothing has ever come of these proposals.
In this answer to a related question, @Shog9 made the argument that, for mods, (basically) the ability to insta-close or insta-reopen questions comes with a duty to use that ability whenever possible, just as an ordinary user uses their regular-strength close and reopen votes - despite the fact that a mod's insta-close or insta-reopen vote is a far blunter instrument than a regular close or reopen vote, and one never intended to be used except in extreme circumstances. Just because moderators are entrusted by the community with the use of such blunt instruments on the rare occasions that they are needed does not justify denying them the opportunity to use a lighter touch when the big hammer isn't called for. Their answer says
When you see a post you think should be closed, close it. When you see a post you think should be re-opened, re-open it. If you're not sure, don't do either.
But potentially-close-or-reopen-worthy questions usually aren't black-and-white, and treating them as if they are invites wrongful closings and reopenings - anyone can make mistakes, even mods, and the requirement for 5 ordinary close/reopen votes serves as a defence against mistaken question closings/reopenings, a defence which is lost when mods are forced to use their black-and-white hammers on greyscale questions.
As such, I hereby (as suggested in a comment on one of the earlier requests) re-request that moderators be granted the ability to cast regular-strength close/reopen votes if they so choose, instead of being restricted to the extra-strength variety.
1: This workaround received serious consideration despite the fact that using it would require the mod to [a] create a second account for this purpose, and then [b] get that account all the way up to 3,000 reputation, before it would allow them to cast normal-strength close/reopen votes; this should serve as an indication of the strength of the need for mods to be able to cast normal-strength close/reopen votes.