@Jeff, that's one of those things where you know it when you see it. It would include very basic, common knowledge that would be the first thing people would learn doing even a cursory search for an answer. Think in terms of what kinds of questions & answers get upvoted vs. downvoted by the community. Well-crafted, useful posts get upvoted. Unclear posts of no benefit to anyone but the author get downvoted. But if you encountered a real-life problem that was important to you, and it took more digging to solve it than the first item that popped up on Google, that's probably a good candidate.

The editor may also be unaware of your improvement if you accept and improve. We want to encourage users to participate, but sometimes rejecting near-useless edits has a long-term payoff.

1. So the bottom line: if the post doesn't warrant closing/deletion, then accept the edit, accept and improve it, or reject and improve it. But if it still needs work and you (reviewer) aren't willing to do it, skip it and let someone else do it rather than rejecting? +1 for that. 2. One other purpose of the review queue is to provide feedback to new users so they can learn the expectations and develop good habits. If their good faith effort fails miserably at improving the post in a meaningful way, just accepting the edit isn't really helping anyone. (cont'd)

This would be easier for people to respond to if you include some examples of questions that seemed to fall into the gray area. Part of it may be that what's happening is really in the other direction; the community makes an exception for questions that are off-topic or borderline off-topic because of some redeeming value. For example, it might attract a good answer that demonstrates there is an on-topic interpretation or the question provides a link to very useful, on-topic information in the answer.

Your question is just too long and complex. Nobody is going to sift through all of that on a Q&A site. If you really need to include that much detail to explain the question, it isn't a good fit for this type of site. The site is designed around bite-sized questions for which the answers will be of value to others. Yours won't help anyone else. You also spend the first few paragraphs describing context that leaves the impression that the problem was created by doing "non-standard" things to tweak your system. Most people's reaction to that is you're kind of on your own when you do that.

I suspect the "unclear" part isn't your question, but how to solve it. We don't know anything about how that web site is set up. It could even be that the requirement to use that button is there to prevent the kind of automated mass downloading you want to do. Also, if this is internal to your company and they don't want to help, that would make your question off-topic on Super User.

That doesn't lend itself to the kind of definitive answer appropriate for a Q&A site. Since no software mechanism is guaranteed to work, this wouldn't be a good question even on Software Recs. If you found a solution and couldn't get that to work, that might be on topic here.

If you want to run any software on a platform that does not support it, you need some form of interface between the software and the OS, plus any required supporting software, and even then, it isn't guaranteed to work. The general options are a compatibility layer, an emulator, or a VM. The more options you take off the table, the slimmer your chances of getting it to work. There isn't a canned solution. If someone had done it, your Internet search would have spotted it. Unless someone has posted a success story, any solution will be through trial and error. (cont'd)

3. It's not about you. If it seems like your posts are receiving disproportionate negative attention, it's because a disproportionate share of them aren't consistent with site guidelines. The system is working as designed and intended. The solution is for you understand the site guidelines better.

1. re: "new members", you don't have much rep, but you've been a site member for 6 1/2 yrs. 2. The site was created to help people, but only in a certain way. It isn't a general purpose help site or forum. It's a knowledge base for people to share good solutions to well-defined problems within a narrow range of topics, and it is curated by the users based on earned privileges. The structure, rules, and moderation are to facilitate that objective. (cont'd)

@VSRawat, let me add one observation. You answer a lot of "bad" questions. These aren't really answerable by site definitions because they aren't clear, too broad in scope, off-topic, etc. It's great that you're trying to help the OP, but for those questions, it is very difficult to provide a good answer, especially one that will be seen as an answer rather than commentary. Answers get judged relative to expectations for good answers on good questions. Consider being more selective in what you answer.

Even if the only possible answer is to use Microsoft's tool for every possible situation, a canonical thread will contain more comprehensive information than a typical Q&A. The idea is that anybody with a question related to the subject can be directed there and will be able to see how that thread answers their question. That often isn't the case with a random Q&A. The subject matter experts may recognize that an answer on a thread also answers what someone is asking, but it may not be obvious to the asker.

Besides everything covered in the question, there's the platform and OS on which you are doing the work (XP era hardware, Win 7 era hardware, newer Windows hardware, Linux, Mac, various netbooks), and the target platform on which you want Win 10 installed (add VM to the above mix). A canonical thread should also be comprehensive in a way a random Q&A usually is not (why, background, what doesn't work, other tools, level of detail, installing Win 10 in multi-boot situations, etc.).

Duplicates are based on the question, not the answers. It's a duplicate if it asks the same thing. If the existing answers apply, that's great. If they don't apply, that can be a clue to what differentiates the question, so that difference can be focused on in an edit. But if the other question asks the same thing and didn't attract a good solution, that doesn't make it not a dupe. There may not be a good solution for the OP's situation; not every problem has an optimum solution. Simply asking the same question again will attract the same answers.