This question about mind maps was posted. I cast a close vote, then when I signed off, it had accrued three more. Today, I see a comment from FumbleFingers indicating a fifth vote was cast, and there are no pending close votes. But the question is open, and the revision history shows it was indeed closed, but then JR reopened it unilaterally. Why?
Below are the questions asked in the post. Ignoring the fact that so many disparate queries makes a question too broad, let's examine each individually.
My question is where do they get the mind map from? Who does produce/publish the map?
These questions are clearly unanswerable by us, because we have no source for the images posted. Additionally, such questions are outside the scope of ELL because they're about publishing or the location of outside resources, not learning English.
How do I get my maps and how do I map foreign language map to my language or otherwise combine maps of two different languages?
This is too broad, and creeps towards off topic (being about software rather than linguistics). How to correctly source, form and mutate mind maps is an intricate and complex topic and far too much for a single question.
I guess there is no one-to-one correspondence between english, estonian and russian word map. Does the concept of mind map suggest that translation is evil?
This is clearly opinion based, and I have trouble even deciding what it would mean for a translation to be evil.
Should I learn new language as if it is my first language because and leave any attempt to find correspondence between two?
Also obviously opinion based. We've closed other "what's the best way to learn" questions as such in the past.
Maybe there's a salvageable question in this post, but as it stands, it should be closed. I presume the community agrees with me, given the down votes, comments and swift closure (but perhaps I do so unjustifiedly). Reopening it without any changes sends the message that this is a well formed, on topic question, which it is not. The question even asks us to say something if it tries to cover too much with its first words, and a couple of us did.
An unexplained reopening and subsequent answering looks... strange. The answer posted doesn't substantially address the bulk of the actual question, as the OP seems to have a decent grasp on what a mind map is and how it diagrams synonyms (which is what the first half of JR's answer explains).
I'm certainly not insinuating anything about JR, but on the face of it, these actions are inscrutable to me. Why reopen?
And, more importantly, what does the rest of the community think about this question? Should it be open? If so, does it need substantial editing?