What you're proposing is to have crap questions, as in a crappy collection of crappy answers. That doesn't help anyone.
Stack Overflow tried this. And finally came to its senses and decided that crap was crap, community wiki or not.
The reason experienced people around here are against those broad, open, pollsy questions is not because they're set in their ways, or because they hate fun. (No, really.) It's because they were tried, and they didn't work.
we would get a nice list of programs of a certain type, sorted by popularity, and hopefully also quality.
If only that was what happened! But no. This hardly ever happens. What you end up with is:
- Answers primarily rated by age. Whoever posts first gets the upvotes.
- Answers secondarily rated by popularity. But secondarily only, and popularity isn't that important. A good recommendation is one that suits a purpose, and you're proposing a question without a purpose.
- Forget about rating for quality. That just doesn't happen on overly broad questions.
- Duplicate answers. Lots of them.
And none of the answers would be saying anything you can't find on a hundred sites out there — with no way to compare the answers, since there are no objectives to compare against.
If you want Slant, (now) you know where to find it. Slant is not a questions and answers site, it works differently. Different purposes, different workings.