I have reviewed 700+ posts that were flagged to be closed, and I still don't fully understand the concept of what posts should or should not be closed. I have failed two audits in a week.
Here is the first post (supposedly fine, I voted for closing):
Here is the second one (supposedly very bad quality, I voted for leaving open):
Frankly, I see no significant difference between the two posts. According to the general consensus of the community, one of them is clearly perfectly fine, and the other one is completely unacceptable. My understanding is that the author should show their work. If that policy is ignored, then I vote for closing the post; unless it is a problem where the very first step requires extreme creativity or the author mentions that hints are appreciated. In that sense, I think the second one is better than the first.
By the way, I don't like the way the results of these audits are presented. The consensus of a community, albeit a strong argument, does not make anything an unquestionable fact. People can be wrong. There is no room for arguments after a failed audit, only a button saying "I understand". What if I don't understand? Or worse, what if I completely disagree?
EDIT: For those who vote to close this post: please read my comment below. The post suggested by Xander Henderson does not cover the main question I asked.