It sounds so easy: *"Just keep it open."* But there are *inclusionists* (keep them open) and there are *exclusionists* (close them). Your suggestion amounts to "just keep them open" while someone else might equally suggest to partially lock controversial questions against *reopening*. 

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. 

**Hence the yo yo effect.**

<h2>A Solution</h2>

Once someone votes to close, you can quickly capture the general consensus by letting everyone vote at once (`vote-to-open`, `vote-to-close`). The total would be shown, as it is now. Once it reaches a *total* of (-5) it's closed. If the voting later reaches (+0) it is re-open. 

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 as everyone alternately waits for their turn to vote.

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

*Bonus: The system would no longer have to worry about aging votes (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.*