Should a question be closed without a discussion? [closed]

Question

I recently posted a couple of questions in two stack communities (this one on physics and this one on skeptics) that have been closed, both deemed off topic.

In one case (skeptics) it has been pointed out to me what was the problem relatively to the etiquette of the community, and I was able to change the question accordingly. Nonetheless, even if it took one day to close the question, after 10 days it is still closed.

In the other case (physics) nothing was said more than "this is not about physics", and again it was closed very quickly (2 days).

I'd like to point out that at the moment one can see in both cases, reading the comments, that there is not a consensus on these questions being off-topic, and that these are both well recieved (in the sense that have a positive vote count.

After these events I feel discouraged to engage in the community because I see that the effort that I put in asking the question is useless, and my curiosity cannot be satisfied.

Also, in light of these things, I think that the process of closing a question is too immediate, and it should involve the possibility for the person that asked the question to interact with the people/person who are deciding to close it.

I would like to listen to other opinions on this topic, maybe I got something wrong, and also, if there is some part of the procedure to have these questions reopened that I'm missing I'd like it to be pointed out to me.

Answer 1

The reputation requirement for close votes generally means that 3-5 users with experience on the site (or a moderator) has closed your question. In general these folks are trusted to make these decisions, having some experience on how the site works.

2 days is hardly 'quick' in the greater scheme of things (Quick can be in 5-10 minutes or less, and 2 days is... slow) , and a valid closure saves everyone time.

If you feel that a closure was unwarranted, and are confident enough to make a case for it - you could try the per site meta.

Closure is not the end, and if the post is salvageable, you could (and should!) take advantage of the comments for the questions to work out how best to give your question the best chance for reopening.

Answer 2

You don't have the informed badge on either Physics or Skeptics. That suggests that you haven't taken the time to read through all the available information to find out what the sites are about and what questions are and aren't acceptable.

Since you're trying to find that out via trial and error what questions are going to be well received you're bound to find that some of those questions fall into the "error" category.

Sites have both tours and help centers to try to help you understand how they work as each site is allowed to, and does work differently.

It does tend to be the case that reopening is harder to achieve than the original closure becuase it's rare that a question that started out off-topic becomes a stellar question after an edit by the question asker.

Not only that it's generally all volunteers closing and reopening questions. They may not have time or wish to have a long discussion on the merits of your question, their time may be better spent answering other people's questions that are well written and on-topic instead of fixing yours. That concept is called opportunity cost.