I've ran into several situations recently where a question that I'd like to answer is collecting close votes quickly. Often (but not always) they are of the silent, anonymous, sans-helpful-comment variety of close votes.
I've posted an answer to this question, still waiting for the satellites to move a little farther before posting my answer to this question, successfully assisted the reopening of this question, just barely posted a well received answer to this question before the door was slammed shut, now with some reopen votes collecting, and today's project is this question with 5 up votes and two close votes. I edited this one to make sure it wasn't too broad after the first close vote, but a "fast-follower/closer" added a second one after the edit.
Under some of these there are discussions in comments that may or may not have relevance to this meta question.
Currently we are running at only about five (5) questions per day, nowhere near being overrun by questions in general, far be it from overrun by low quality questions. We may have a first question from a new user only a few times per week.
Some new users sometimes only have one question to ask and may not come back for a second. For them, why not just edit the question a bit and help them get an answer? Others seem to learn quickly from the edit and their next question is much better.
Since the number of total questions per day on this site can be counted on one hand, what is the need for the insta-close, as defined by close voting right away without leaving a helpful comment and waiting a day to see if the OP picks up on the suggestion and clarifies or edits?
Closing quickly can be very important on the high-rate sites, but here, what is the actual advantage of quick (and often silent) closing votes versus more helpful activity?
Occasionally we have a problematic question that does need to be closed because it attracts cranky or weird answers, but mostly this just doesn't happen here.
I'd like to see some discussion on both sides of this. Thanks!