I frequently see questions from this stack in the Hot Network Questions list (the network-wide list of questions in the right sidebar) that I find interesting. I sometimes answer them and have acquired a small amount of rep from a couple of upvotes per answer.
However, I'm not a scientist, student, professor, teacher, researcher or university staffer. It has been about 7 years since I last was in a school in the capacity of a student. Because of this, I'm not sure whether it's wholly appropriate for me to answer these questions.
On one hand, I have no experience with academia, so I don't know any of the established procedures and rules from Academia. What I suggest might be completely inappropriate for someone who is active in Academia.
On the other hand, I have no experience with Academia, so I might be able to provide a unique perspective from someone with a minimum of preconceptions. In some notable cases in the past, such perspectives has led to stuff like unsolvable conjectures being solved, impossible machines being invented and generally major advances in a number of scientific fields.
From reading another meta answer, I have seen at least one person explicitly mention
- A user that, based on her/his bio and SE habitus, seems trustworthy to answer the question
as something they typically upvote and
- Answers that seem to fall into the "uninformed opinion" category ("I don't have experience with this, but clearly ...")
as something they typically downvote, with this answer getting over a dozen upvotes. Does this mean that this community does not want answers from people who are not part of the scientific community?