Please provide 10k+ users more close votes.
Putting questions on-hold in a timely fashion is critical in providing useful feedback to new users. It's rare for salvageable questions to be put on-hold without a constructive comment having been left. Quickly putting questions on-hold keeps the question from attracting answers that may be invalidated by the suggested edits.
Anecdotal evidence shows that we're seeing a number of low-quality questions coming from users with question bans on SO. I have seen a number of comments where the OP indicates they can't ask questions anymore on SO.
We want to maintain site quality. Programmers has one of the highest answered rates (98%) for the Technology sites. But at an average of 43 questions per day, it's easy for us to fall behind.
It's rare for our close review queue to be completely empty. While we don't have the challenges of the SO close queue, I think that for smaller sites having a backlog in the close review queue is not a good thing. A backlog indicates that new users aren't getting the feedback they need in a timely fashion.
For the sake of consistency, I would suggest an additional 26 (total 50) so it matches what SO allows.
From the help page on close privileges
You may cast up to 24 close votes per day (50 on Stack Overflow).
Give all 10k users additional ### close votes
Give 10k users ###/2 close votes
Give 20k users ###/2 close votes
Option C: Tie votes into close queue activity (ie. +## at 250 reviews; +## at 1k reviews) along with a tie into reputation levels.
Why not open this for everyone?
Once you've earned 10k on Programmers, you should have a good feel for the site dynamics and be active in self-moderation. That's why we allow vote-to-delete at 10k+. Adding more close votes recognizes the commitment that's been made and allows those users to continue shaping the site's culture.
Won't this lead to more questions showing up as on-hold?
Perhaps it will, but that only indicates we have been letting those new users down. Questions are put on-hold because they don't meet the site's criteria for high quality Q&A. With established users frequently running out of close votes on a daily basis, new questions that should be put on-hold are slipping through the cracks. Putting a poor question on-hold encourages the OP to revise the question; get the real answer they needed; and provide meaningful Q&A for the site.