Problems with low-traffic Stack Exchange sites

Question

There seems to be several issues with some Stack Exchange sites. There is very low traffic in the sites, and question I ask are often deterred.

For one example, take a look at the https://math.stackexchange.com/ site. Every question that I have asked on that site has been closed and deleted. And I tried asking on https://math.meta.stackexchange.com. Even those questions were closed and deleted.

If you need another example, take a look at the https://cooking.stackexchange.com/ site. One question that I have asked has 1 answer, but it gets closed as needing details of clarity. I expand the question, and resubmit it to the reopen review queue. I also ask on meta. The question has remained unanswered for almost a month. And later the parent question gets deleted by the community. and I vote to undelete the question.

Last week I have set a bounty in one question question on the https://psychology.stackexchange.com/ site. I will copy and paste the question text here:

Twin studies were used in behavioral genetics research to understand the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors to various traits and behaviors. IQ, or intelligence quotient is studied using twin designs.

Research using twin designs has consistently found IQ to be highly heritable, with estimates typically in the 50-80% range, depending on the specific population and the methods used. This suggests that genetic factors play an important role in determining individual differences in IQ. However, heritability estimation does not provide information about the specific genes involved or the mechanisms by which they contribute to IQ. One of the ethical concerns that I think apply to this type of study is the potential psychological harm that could result from discovering someone's twin later in life, especially if their life experiences had changed. Another ethical concern is the possible violation of privacy or confidentiality, as some twins or their adoptive families might not want to be contacted or identified by the researchers or the media. A third ethical concern is the potential bias or coercion that could affect participation or responses of the twins, as they might be driven to conform to certain expectations or stereotypes about twins or intelligence. These were some of the issues that I think should be considered when conducting or evaluating twin studies on IQ.

How can a researcher take into consideration the ethical concerns related to twin studies?

Sources:

Joseph, J. (2022). A Reevaluation of the 1990 “Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart” IQ Study. Human Development, 66(1), 48–65. https://doi.org/10.1159/000521922

Kelmenson, A., & Klitzman, R. (2020). Experiment on identical siblings separated at birth: Ethical implications for researchers, universities and archives today. Journal of Medical Ethics blog. https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2020/05/11/experiment-on-identical-siblings-separated-at-birth-ethical-implications-for-researchers-universities-and-archives-today/

Molwickpedia. (n.d.). Non-identical and identical twin studies on IQ. https://molwick.com/en/intelligence/055-twins-brothers.html

Themantic Education. (2019). Key Study: The Minnesota Twin Study of Twins Reared Apart. https://www.themantic-education.com/ibpsych/2019/02/11/key-study-the-minnesota-twin-study-of-twins-reared-apart/

Note: Hopefully someone will answer this question before the bounty expires. If any improvement is required, I expect other users to suggest improvements, not to close the question.

One hour is left now. I hope someone will answer the question now.

This question has started with two upvotes, but after setting the bounty to the question, one of the mods has said to be more specific. I have made an edit after that. Then one of the users has asked me to add what ethical concerns I think apply here. Then I make more edits to the question. The current version of the question is quoted above. But the bounty has failed without any answer. So, I have deleted the question for now to deal with it later.

The overall issue is the traffic of these Stack Exchange sites. Since this site has higher traffic than the other sites, I have decided to ask for advice here. How do I deal with these low-traffic sites?

Answer 1

edit:

Become part of the solution

Your main problem appears that your questions don't get the answers that you feel they deserve.

That is indeed a problem and you find that on most sites, many questions remain unanswered. This graph shows the steady decline in the absolute number of questions asked and answered on ServerFault.

You can really make difference there, pay it forward and start answering questions that haven't been answered yet. Writing good answers also comes with a learning curve but sharing your own knowledge is very rewarding in itself and investigating relevant sources & references is also educational and increases your own knowledge.

(Fair warning: far too often not even the person asking the question will show any appreciation for your answer.)

---

Original rant:

I've only been really active on ServerFault so I can only tell you about how we see "community" here. This is my standard answer when people complain about their question getting closed by the community:

"On ServerFault we're strict on topicality rules because any Q&A platform with only questions and no answers, is useless.

Unfortunately there are many more people asking questions, many new ones every day even, but far fewer people actively answering them.
Therefore the site rules, the badges and (fake internet) points, the community moderation tools, the actual moderators, they all exist for the main purpose: to retain and keep engaged the most valuable resource on any Q&A platform; the people actively answering questions

We do not want to lose the people who (regularly) answer questions

Also see: https://meta.serverfault.com/a/8896/

---

This is not paid vendor support with a contractual service level agreement.

Community members answer questions for fun, out of interest and maybe a "noblesse oblige" in the spirit of masters-apprentices, Open Source community spirit and/or other personal reasons.

I think that community members are only willing to return to Q&A sites where they see a lively platform with interesting questions and good, useful answers.

The SE platform provides those community members with the tools achieve that.

You're not entitled to getting answers

And to be more harsh: Most people that ask questions feel they're entitled to an answer but they NEVER contribute back to the community they ask support from.

I know that every person that asks a question feels that their problem is relevant. But not every question you might have, should be asked on ServerFault and when you asked you are NOT entitled to a good answer or any answer at all.

When people do have on-topic question people seem to overlook that good answers require a clear and useful questions which are well written , on-topic and contain sufficient details to provide you with a good solution.

You can do everything correct and even then you are still NOT entitled to a good answer or any answer at all.

---

Maybe it appears a bit petulant, it's our (the active users) playground, collectively "we" make the rules and when you want to play here you (your questions) will have to fit in and gain our interest. And that takes some effort and time. Please start contributing in different ways than only asking questions, because without engaged returning visitors you won't be part of the solution.