Many of the homework, on hold, proposed to close, etc questions are from posters with a reputation of 1 or double digits. The situation appears to be that someone is either in a homework / coursework panic and just bangs a question on out of desperation or the question is ill defined. Either way, would putting in a minimum reputation requirement (of >1, 101?) help save moderators time in the long run, increase participation for people to build up the reputation and save space & time in the question lists while waiting for posts to get deleted or closed?
This is probably a really bad idea. Many new users come to this network, because they seek answers. They might stay because they get one. And while they are here they might answer questions themselves.
I would assume that in more than ninety percent of all cases one question started the chain.
If we take that away, users would only have the possibility to answer. Which will put those bad requests, which you are referring to, exactly where they do not belong. There would be a lot more to clean up.
Another reason is, that one of the principles of the network is, that you can try it without registering personal details. This would have to go over board.
Another point is, that such questions barely ever need a moderator to deal with them. They are closed by the community, they are automatically deleted by the system. And this system works very well.
Big thanks to everyone participating in the review queues.
Stackexchange’s model is:
Anyone can ask a question. Anyone can answer.
If you turn anyone into anyone with 10 rep, well … It’ll be us, the core crew and no new additions whatsoever. Because how are you supposed to accumulate 10 rep without asking or answering questions? Edit suggestions …? Think about it for a second and then cringe.