Out of curiosity why not a purge unanswered questions?
There is lots of talk about "fixing the site" and its said that answering unanswered question is a good way to do this. I don't understand the reasoning behind this.
I would like to know why the effort to why fix them other than to make metrics look nicer? Below are my reasons for thinking its a counter productive effort that stifles current activity.
First there is little to no incentive to go back and answer these question and the incentives that exist are not community driven. I'm referring to the bounties that seem to have been offered from the 2013 Refactoring thread. Though well intentioned I don't like this sort of behavior, personally I would rather solve the issue through leveraging community involvement through using the existing site mechanics as they were intended.
Second most of them are subtly unanswerable. Either they are off topic or they develop to become too localized. The few good unanswered question I could find are unanswered because the question is brutally hard.
If the question is one that the community has an interest in getting answered it will be asked again. This time with the opportunity of having the attention of the current community on it. If it deserves to be closed it is more likely to be closed. If it deserves to be answered its more likely to be answered (due to visibility allowing for more up-votes and the possibility of engaging the OP in necessary).
It seems purging them would increase activity and the quality of the site as a QA forum. Additionally I help prevent stagnation cause by those questions causing similar ones (that may be a better fit) to be off topic. To elaborate think of a venn diagram, the questions remove the incentives for a sizable circle area within the circle that is all on topic question.
I figure there will be examples of questions that are popular though unanswered. The purging can of course have exceptions based upon votes/views but that should not a part of this discussion.
Edits to Address Points Made in the Answers
So I believe the goal behind both ideas is to bring attention to the questions. The Refactor address this by using (mostly) artificial incentives to involve a small subset of the community (the ones who participate in meta - the ones who don't feel like participating).
Deleting and allowing the questions to be re-asked involves the entire active community in addition to using the incentive system the site is built around. The bold bit being the important distinction.
Also I suppose deletion wouldn't be necessary. Perhaps a mass closing would be less absolute option? I fully understanding not wanting to be the person who name is on the deletions. Perhaps closing them with a message that is is okay (or even encouraged) to ask similar questions would be an alternative.