When we vote for closure we put some justification of why we think this particular question is worth closing. However when one votes for re-opening it seems the process is different. For example I can see that the question has re-opening votes but I am not aware of what the arguments are. Does it make sense to add such kind of feature so that other people could reconsider their vision of how valuable the question is?
Part of the confusion is that there's an automatic reopen vote caused by any kind of edit to a question, no matter how trivial the edit happens to be.
I think having some kind of argument for a reopen vote could be a useful tool, but I don't know if that's something the overall SE community would want - this is a fairly low-traffic stack, and something like this could well be a nightmare if used in the big stacks.
Questions do not need a reason to be open. They only need a reason to be closed. By definition, a question that is being voted to be re-opened simply means it has been edited to no longer have any reasons that warrant its closure anymore.
If you look at the question in an unbiased manner and say "no, this doesn't meet any of the reasons to close" then you should consider voting to re-open it. Questions should be open whenever possible, and only closed so long as they meet criteria for closure.