A somewhat common pattern on this site seems to be that a new user will post a poor question, receive a bunch of downvotes and have their question closed. If we're lucky, they'll (or someone) improve their question and it will be reopened. However, the initial downvotes will remain, many (if not most) of which may have been regarding presentation or context issues that were corrected in the edit, rather than the intrinsic value of the question. It is, unsurprisingly, also not too uncommon to see new users encountering this situation complain in the comments about how many downvotes their getting before they have a chance to improve their question - and, unfortunately, the best counsel to offer such users is to improve it anyways and hope that other people will upvote it afterwards.
To address this issue, I suggest the following:
If a question is closed, edited, then reopened, anyone who cast a downvote on it should be pinged to look at the question again.
This feature would help to ensure that downvotes remain justified, even after the content to which they apply changes. However, given that it would only be triggered after an edit and 5 reopen votes cast by 3k+ users (presumably an edit which causes reopening), there would already be considerable evidence that the community has changed its opinion on the question before this feature would be activated. I doubt that this would become an annoyance, even to prolific downvoters, since reopening is not too common, and if such pings became excessive, one could constrain it to only apply to new questions or new users or significant edits. For new users, this feature could provide a "second chance", a greater incentive to edit their questions, and less frustration with quick downvotes. In short, it would be a relatively simple way to improve the experience of new users, without burdening much the rest of the community.