(I could not resist the marketing flavor of it).
I have invited three up to now. For the two of them I pointed to a specific question that I Knew it was in their area of interest and knowledge. One of them signed up and offered an answer.
I am posting this because my (unverified) impression is that the user-mix is not yet balanced. We have much more (active) users with low or medium Economics literacy but truly interested in understanding and using the Economics way of thinking and analysis (and I honestly thank them for their interest and for their presence and the time and energy they devote here), but not that many experts.
The majority of the questions are either too broad or too foundational. Some of them may still be answered in a useful way and in accordance with the spirit of an .SE site, but in any case, we are short of questions that are more targeted, either theoretically, or empirically. I understand that the "automatic" characterization of such questions would be "more technical" -but I object to that, if only because "technical" in many corners silently means "uninterestingly narrow". Really?
Then think (or learn) about the Reinhart-Roggof Controversy, and how the "devil that was hiding in the details" had such a large impact. To me Economics is a very fascinating philosophical way to approach and interpret the world, but it is also a scientific discipline dealing with and affecting human livelihoods, if not lives, -and you can never become too technical, when the stakes are so high. So, please,