I've had a few frustrating experiences with this. I have read a few posts, like this one. And I totally agree, we should be asking questions that "describe a problem", more than "start a discussion".
Triggering question here with the very helpful people talking to me.
But for many of my questions, if only because that's how I think, it's difficult to even narrow down to successful criteria for an answer. Because, and I'll try to explain this so it makes sense... the question I'm asking is based on gestaldt, or overall 'wholeness' or 'what-everything-means-together' of what ends up being a pretty long list of things. Like, my question isn't about any one of those things, it's about the list itself.
And if I tried to break it down any further than I have, I'd lose the actual question I had in the first place. Not to mention, if I knew whether any of my specific 'list items' was wrong, then I would've asked about it specifically. And what if I'm just looking for general feedback, or suggestions, or just plain validation? "Is this general thing good? What would you change?" kind of thing. I do know what I want out of it, but I don't know what the specific problem is.
I feel like all of those things are still valuable here, if understandably hard to answer. I want to improve on this, while also getting activity and helpful feedback on the questions I actually have. But I apparently lack some technique there.