- Stack Overflow is a site by programmers, for programmers. Programmers ask and the same group of programmers answers. Since askers are also answerers, the community can thrive.
- Gaming is a site by videogamers, for videogamers. Gamers ask and the same group of gamers answers. Since askers are also answerers, the community can thrive.
- Skeptics is a site by skeptics, for skeptics. Skeptics ask and the same group of skeptics answers. Since askers are also answerers, the community can thrive.
Whenever there is a disconnect between askers and answerers, there is a problem. A tension starts between those who only answer and those who only ask, causing drama and outright refusal to answer questions. Some of the posts on this meta make it even sound like this is a ghetto for those who aren't born native English speakers. To me, an "English Language Learner", this reeks of segregation, rather than an attempt to better answer my questions.
I am worried that the main force driving this site might be disgruntled ELU users who really don't want questions that are "too easy" on their site, but also don't want to close or downvote these questions. This force won't last forever, for the whole point of such a drive would be to stop having those easy questions asked on "their" site in the first place.
So, since "audience and expertise" is one of the essential criteria for survival of the proposal — since a site's topic is supposed to be mainly determined by its audience, the audience that will be able to give expert answer to itself — what is the self-serving, self-sustaining audience of ELL?
(See also Robert Cartaino's post about reciprocity and ELU.)