It sounds so easy: *"Just keep it open."* The problem is people have a bias one way or the other and these "let's leave it open/let's leave it closed" solutions always expose that bias... not the actual voting.

There are two groups of people who vote on these things; the *inclusionists* (keep them open) and the *exclusionists* (close them). **See the problem?** Right now, if a question is open, you can *only* vote to close. If it's closed, you can *only* vote to reopen. 

These so-called **"close wars" are a misnomer** for people waiting in line for their chance to vote five at a time (5-close, 5-reopen, 5-close, 5-reopen...). **Hence the yo yo effect.**

<h2>A Solution</h2>

Once someone votes to close, let everyone vote (close: `yes`, `no`). The total votes would be shown, as it is now. If the total votes reaches (-5) or less, the post is closed. If the total votes later reaches (+0) or more, the post is re-opened.

**But it's *way more likely*** that a general consensus will quickly be reached without forcing the question through the close-reopen-close-reopen cycle.

Its an beautiful, simple, elegant solution. **So what am I am I missing?**

*Bonus: The system would no longer have to worry about aging votes (where close-votes eventually expire after a certain period of time). With the +/- votes shown, someone is free to counteract the random close-vote that accumulates over time.*