I'll say. I'm too scared to use it because every legit question I've seen is shut down by a mod with bonkers reasoning
Meanwhile, the spam/abuse deletion, removal of illegitimate votes, conflict resolution, and so on that having mods is actually valuable for happen behind the scenes.
The question looks like an "I'm out of my wits please debug my application" question which isn't atomic or precise enough to fit the SO format. I would have liked the person asking the question to provide a complete minimal failing example to even begin working on an answer.
Most questions on SO these days (that are not "do my homework for me please") are garbage like this. Signal to noise ratio is horrendous. Gin, Next.js, whatever are pure noise, the actual problem is glossed over in a vague sentence: "my browser is getting the setcookie header correctly, it doesn't say it's blocked at all but my browser isn't setting the cookie". You could try to talk the submitter into providing the complete HTTP request, which could take a very long back and forth, but after a thousand questions like this, you probably decide it's not worth the effort to salvage the question; or like me, you decide it's not worth participating in the site at all.
Because once you can construct the perfect question, you can most certainly answer it yourself. It should be OK for questions to be somewhat vague, to contain "noise" and non-related stuff (because how on earth should the person asking the question know if something is relevent if they don't know the solution already?).
And I think in most cases a "complete minimal failing example" is way overkill. If someone in the future runs into the same problem, they have code already, and if there is already a solution accepted, then all that is needed is the description of the problem case and the solution (and in the best case, a root cause analysis, but that is an optional extra).
Some mods seem to think that SO is the next Encyclopedia Britannica, and each question is an article in it. This was not true in the beginning, and I don't feel like this is the right direction. But who cares about what I think.
Not if what you're lacking is declarative knowledge, which is what the site tries to elicit, to a first approximation anyway.
You should reduce the question to the point where you can say "between substeps 1.3.5 and 1.3.6 there seems to be a proposition I don't know. What is it?"
If you can't reduce the problem to a missing proposition, there are better resources to turn to for help with debugging it step-by-step until you have isolated a problem. I've had success with mentoring and IRC.
""" I have this working no problem locally , but in production with different domains, my browser is getting the setcookie header correctly, it doesn't say it is blocked at all but the browser isn't setting the cookie. """
I know there's a question in there somewhere but it feels pretty much like a run on sentence and the clarity is lacking. There's something that could be wrapped up in that final paragraph that I think could make the question more direct.
Obviously it's not perfect, but it's no worse than asking human coworkers, which are also sometimes wrong. (I'd prefer not to interrupt my human coworkers with questions with searchable answers anyway.)