> You're also always going to have trouble with getting people to ask
> questions, unless the concept of asking for help/guidance has been drilled
> into them as not stupid, but constructive, for a very long time. I'm
> talking life span.

Responses people expect are also a barrier to participation. Multiple
people have told me offline they don't ask for help because the answers
make them feel dumb. They know people don't mean to make them feel that
way, but it's still an issue. Especially for newer members, answers that
use excessive jargon, require skills/knowledge not inherent to the question
to make sense, dismiss approaches/suggestions as wrong, or push solutions
that involve steep learning curves discourage discussion.

Some people don't post because they don't recognize the value of their own
contributions. They assume those with more experience/skills have better
ideas when that's often not true. As a result, only a handful of over 3000
list members post anything when you know many of the others have all kinds
of great ideas.

Regarding what questions and belong on the list and what doesn't,  I don't
think there's any risk of c4l getting flooded with irrelevant questions.
Most postings on this list seem to be about events, positions, reports,
awards, etc. that are of interest only to some and that's not a bad thing.
IMO, it would be a good thing to have more tech in the mix and more
diversity in the tech topics discussed.

Besides, a lot of the best stuff is learned by accident. That's hard to do
with tightly focused questions in tightly focused venues -- the problem at
hand gets solved, but broader implications and opportunities to apply the
ideas elsewhere may be missed.