This question is closed but it also has a bounty. That's new to me. https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/656037/binomial-test-in-python-for-11-ratio
@SextusEmpiricus bounty or not, if a question is not clear, it's not answerable and it's ineluctable to be closed as unclear. If OP responds constructively to the queries raised for clarification, the post could be single-handedly reopened by a mod (coincidentally Scortchi is involved in the discussion and closure).
I don't see any convincing reason why putting bounty would somehow make an unclear question safe from closure.
On the other hand, if someone feels the closure is unjust, they can vote for reopening it.
@User1865345 You are correct: bountied questions aren't automatically immune from closure.
However, every time I have closed a question with a bounty, I have refunded the points to the person offering the bounty (which is almost always the OP). That's something diamond mods can do that even high-rep users cannot, AFAIK.
@whuber ohh. That I was not aware of. But I think in the present case, clarification has been sought; if they provide so, that can be reopened with bounty working as usual.
@User1865345 Right. That's why I have not interfered in the process: the community appears to be using that prospect to help motivate improvements to the question.
To me this is new. Before, questions with bounties were always blocked from being closed. I joined the vote to close the question (while being surprised that this was possible), so I don't mind questions with bounties being closed, but I thought that the bounty would be refunded automatically.
@SextusEmpiricus: I cast the third close vote, & I might have refunded the bounty; but didn't, for the reason @whuber has divined. After all, you & others have already put some effort into elucidating what's needed to make the q. answerable - perhaps as a result of the prominence afforded it by the bounty - & it's nothing that ought to be unduly onerous to provide.
