Question: I think it is not a good practice to close doors on one's face! My English is not good? It's ok. Tell me that. I'll accept it and I'll make an effort to make it better. I have let an incomplete answer because a bad educated person closed a door on my face!

Answer: 
Closing questions off topic questions is an integral part of the stack exchange format. If closing questions didn't prevent people from answering them then the act of closing questions would be meaningless.

There isn't a system to indicate that a question has pending draft answers and in the eyes of the community moderation process if the question *as written* has issues it shouldn't receive any answers. Unfortunately this occasionally results in race conditions where you can't submit an answer to a question that was closed while composing the draft.

When you gain sufficient reputation you can see who voted to close questions. I can't remember what the rep threshold is for seeing who voted to close a question. I can tell you that it was very likely 5 regular members of the community who voted to close it.
**I really agree with the asker and I *upvoted* this question.**

From many answerer's perspective, also mine, topics get closed too quickly on WB imho, even for first answers. Sometimes there's long answers, because of the subject. These take time. When starting research and answer, why would you take 1-2 close votes into account ? You may disagree.. but suddenly, it's getting 20:00 PM European time and the topic gets closed, because some new peer-mod folks come online and start their reviews. Close-Close-Close and the three votes arrive before you can finish. I recognize the situation.. and the *frustration*..

The reason given is often "they have to edit" but I don't see many openers do that. I tried a few times myself, with peer mod privs, to "salvage" a topic. But it is difficult to be on time. The opener.. just flies by again 12 hours later and finds his/her topic closed.

Most times, when answerers put a protest, we'll get the reply *"you don't answer questions that need to be closed"* but.. at first, it wasn't closed.. and when you have invested 1-2 hours in an answer (that happens), it's difficult to acknowledge that there is *any* reason your submit will bounce!

My proposal would be: ease up. Don't go rush rush with these reviews. And enter the question list first, don't go review right away. Read questions that interest you, answer them. Then do the reviews. I skip most, actually. If something is unanswerable, don't worry, few answers will follow. If something is off topic for WB, the answers can still remain *on topic*, close it next day.

And please give more advice.. also to 500+ points askers.. the rules here are complicated. Try to comment in a positive way, without attacking the opener's intent, with words like "fishing" and "misconception", like it happens now. That will not motivate to go editing a question. *Explain* to the opener, why a vote to close is set and promise you will reverse it on a good edit. Sometimes I see topics without any comment explaining the close vote. Users don't even know who closed or why.

Let's have some more respect, too. Not everyone knows what "unanswerable" is, or the "book test". Someone asking about a hypothetical subject, without any science or reality tags, should not be bothered with "opinion based", or "single answer" or "fact-based" general SE constraints. As long as the (single) question - and its answers - help finding *scientifically plausible* explanations for the reader, it should be allowed on SE/WB, imho.

**Suppose we would want 100% SE-compliant quality..**

If SE wants to avoid these frustrations on SE/WB.. be compliant [to SE culture](https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/?_ga=2.171167656.92693083.1638304628-995428532.1603487676) around subjective questions, you'd have to comply to rules like *"Stack Exchange is about questions with objective, factual answers. "*..

If you really want to impose that, change the forum software to let the opener choose between science-based, hard-science and reality-check tags. One of these tags is obligatory.. and questions *and* answers should comply to it. It would reduce the audience, reduce the scope, and eliminate 40-50 other tags. There are no science-based merfolk, or science-based dragons, or science-based FTL, or science based life on neutron stars. All these questions can be closed immediately.