Instead of closing questions first specify what needs to be improved

Question

Final update: Apologies to mods, it was frustrating to always trying to help and not even get a hint of what is needed to fix the question, It has been emotionally draining to get any hints of what was suppose to be a simple pondering.

Edit Asking what needs to be improved ends in only downvotes and no suggestion of what to do to improve the question, it only shows that there was nothing to be improved in the first place. Thanks all for their constructive contribution good to know what to (not) expect next time.

Asking a question which is really (has the tag) recreational (Analogue operation to $\frac{d x^n}{d x}=nx^{n-1}$ but ending with $nx^{n-i}$ instead ($i$ is complex ))

Getting the closed reason : "Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc."

As mentioned in the question

I have no reason or application for this, just wondered what is specific to differentiation that causes shifting by real magnitudes only, I am assuming that there is a more general operation where the normal differentiation is special case when a specific value is used.

Not sure how to change the question after the provided answer, using the answer to edit the question would make a very well thought answer to look idiotic.

So I found out closing questions are done by humans not by system bots. What is the purpose of just using the templated generic text that does not seem to apply in this instance?

In short, what can the question be changed to? In many instances I have edited questions for others to show what and how the question can be improved, is it too much to ask for the same? How could people be so not helpful in helping one another in an open system like this?

Answer 1

The basic reason to close Questions is to prevent Answers from being posted until the problem statement is in clear enough form to admit a mathematically reasoned argument that solves it.

So Reviewers will judge the prospect that the Question is close to being in such shape. If the prospects seem poor, then closing the Question until substantial fixes are made is appropriate. Sometimes these edits are forthcoming. In other cases the Original Poster (OP) may decide the effort is not worthwhile or the problem was just a misunderstanding, or for some other reason never explained just abandon their post.

Having a Question closed invites the OP to improve it. In your specific post you realized that $i$ as used in $x^{n-i}$ was open to misinterpretation, and you clarified that $i$ meant the imaginary root of $-1$, not an integer variable. Such clarifications are fairly routine. The problem is naturally clearer to the OP than to the Readers until the setup and context of the problem is shared.

Sometimes a greater difficulty occurs, as I believe it did here. The OP believes that the Question makes perfect sense the way it was written and sees no need for changes. In short the OP sees the problem as clear and does not appreciate the Reader's inability to parse it. But the Reader must rely on the OP as the expert as to what is being asked! It would, for example, not work out well if the OP were, in the face of having a Question closed, insist that it is the Readers' responsibility to explain what the problem means.

Your Question has a structure that can be sketched as "What if we did X but with Y instead of Z?" This outline can be a very good heuristic for coming up with interesting math problems. But bear in mind that research effort is required before posting a Question. Even a very big misunderstanding of whether it makes sense to do "X with Y instead of Z" would be acceptable to many Readers if they were presented with research that supported the OP's belief that it ought to be so.

My suggestion would be to drop back and ask a more threshold Question, perhaps along the lines of "Why doesn't it makes sense to do X with Y when we are allowed to do X with Z?" This more fundamental perspective might even permit you to make a stronger research effort, and the insight that you get will be worth three times as much as when others try to tell to you the same point.