Currently, when someone sees a question about something that doesn’t seem a good fit for the site,
the only thing they can do is the least-effort option is to vote to close it for the reason that it ‘does not appear to be about retrocomputing, within the scope defined in the help center’. This may leave the asker puzzled as to why their question is considered off-topic: clearly if the asker posted the question, they must have thought it was on-topic, spammers notwithstanding. And it’s not just the askers who are baffled. I myself semi-regularly see questions being voted off as supposedly ‘off-topic’ that I would consider perfectly within scope according to past consensus. Sometimes reasoning comes in comments, but not always.
So I think more specific close reasons are needed, to encourage voters to explain themselves, and to provide more actionable feedback to askers. That said, like before, I don’t think any new close reason should come with an automated migration path. Migrations are too cumbersome to undo, and the closures too often turn out wrong and get reversed later.
I think I’m going to submit proposed close reasons as answers under this question, so that they can be voted on individually. If anyone else wants to do the same, each proposed close reason should include the following:
[Short moniker] [Explanation what questions fall within this close reason]
[Rationale for closing questions falling under the criteria]
Displayed to the asker:
[Instructions how to edit the question to make it on-topic or where else to move it]
And optionally some rationale for introducing the close reason and defining it in such a way.