This may be the longest Stack Overflow question I've ever seen, with a code block, three graphs, and a list of links to related questions, comprising four and a half screenfuls on my display. (The accepted answer is five and a half screenfuls.)
(Not every question needs to be this long--this one's length seems to be because the asker is more a historian than a mathematician--but length and such sections--graphs, links etc--are one way it gets signaled that you really have put effort into the question.)
So when asking (~80 questions asked so far across SE sites, only 8 on Stack Overflow), I try to put effort into it (and show it), but ultimately still just treat each question as a gamble and if it doesn't "work out" (question got few/zero/negative votes, or no useful answers) it's no big deal (just lost a turn, try again next time… at least I learned something about what sorts of questions work well on this particular site, and got an opportunity to state my question as clearly as I could, which is often the most useful part of the process). But I can see how people who approach asking questions on StackOverflow from a mindset of "I need help and hope to get it here" can easily get frustrated.