The main problem is posing as a question and answer site, yet wanting to be the go-to reference on the web for getting accurate helpful solutions.
The people asking for help are not there (most aren't) because they heard about this fantastic site that wants to be the go-to reference on the web for getting accurate helpful solutions.
The people asking for help don't want (most don't) to build the go-to reference on the web for getting accurate helpful solutions.
They want programming help.
It's a trick SO has been playing for years. Not that they'll ever realize it. The founders may not deep thinkers. Or they realize what they're doing and don't care.
After all these years, the founders have not fixed the SO problem. They have failed to address the conflict of asking knowledge-needy users to help build the go-to reference on the web for getting accurate helpful solutions without subjecting them to cruelty.
It's conceptually simple, and a bit of a bait-and-switch.
They pitch the site as a question-and-answer site. In the field of education, it is extremely counterproductive and cruel to subject someone lacking a bit of knowledge, and for whatever reason they lack it, to berating. It's just not accepted. If someone asks a question you simply do not humiliate them or berate them, or 'close the question', or edit the question they asked! It's not even the asker's question anymore if another user edits it! Curation by humiliation.
In any normal, respectful setting that promotes itself as a source to get help -- a "question and answer site" -- if an authority figure in that setting berates someone who lacks a bit of: - knowledge - or even the style or manner of how they ask questions
that authority figure would be fired, dismissed.
It's extremely unfortunate that the founders of SO are not brave enough (or deep-thinking enough?) to realize that failing to disclose to Users the truth about the potential cruelty, embarrassment, and humiliation they might suffer using the "question and answer site" -- is shameful.
If a school or university allowed any educational authority figure (like moderators, etc.) to berate and humiliate people with less knowledge than they, the institution would find itself in trouble.
Some of us believe the founders realized that if they told the truth -- "we're casting a big net, a lot of you who fall for the 'it's a question and answer site' are going to be humiliated by the moderators and other users who know more than you do" -- the founders probably realized if they had full disclosure of the "curation by humiliation" process, no one would use the site.
The fact is, the majority of SO users have been subjected to this "curation by humiliation" but are hesitant to speak out about it.