Well, if people don't care to get familiar with the site (checking how others use it, reading the faq and rules), it's not weird if their questions get closed..
Requiring familiarization with a system before the power to change things is very very basic. Any open source project require it. I can't directly go and get a patch accepted into the kernel without familiarize myself with the project, the code, and the process of suggesting a patch. I can't request a youtube video to be deleted/undeleted without reading about youtubes process.
familiarization is the basic of the basic requirement for doing anything anywhere.
Information on how to contribute to the kernel--and most big open source projects--is readily available in multiple formats. This is the first I've heard that Stack Overflow has an appeal process.
The problem is that you have a complex and exclusionary process to begin with.
The comparison with open-source isn't apt; inclusion in the mainline of an open-source project affects every user of that project. Keeping code that does not fit with the goals of the project negatively impacts existing users of that project.
Not so for SO questions, or for Wikipedia pages; a page or question you never see, but contains useful information you don't personally think is notable (or "constructive"), costs you nothing to keep.
This is just the Wikipedia editorial/deletionist problem. Some people are more interested in enacting and enforcing process and community "norms".
