I see one dimension into which MSE users might be partitioned into two parts, is into the "asker/answerers" and the "curators".
Asker/answerers view the site as a place for those who would ask and those would answer, to come together to ask and answer questions. No matter how great the collection of museum-piece answers becomes, people will still be interacting. The primary function is the interaction of people having a "mutual incidence of wants" who exchange their wares and gain by it.
Curators on the other hand see the site primarily as a place where a museum of good questions and answers is curated. Emphasis is on the judgement of quality, the maintaining of standards. Human activity, and the process of the site's users having their immediate needs met, is secondary to the policing of what makes it into the museum.
Moreover, users who would come here to interact with each other are proactively impeded. If content is not approved, close votes are corralled with a view to reaching the threshold for deletion.
I will nail my colours to the mast. I do not fully understand this second category of people. They come across to me like they see others up to something and it offends them. I suspect they are the kind of people, who if I elected to grow my front lawn they would come and cut it for me while I was out. Their egos gain by the feeling of being "the ones upholding standards round here". I'm just calling it how I see it - please tell me what you think motivates you if you see it differently.
Today I saw Hagen von Eitzen was on a ban and I disapproved of this most strongly. I've not been around here much lately but it looks a lot to me like the "lawn police" might have organised themselves to the point they have a disproportionate bearing upon site activity. I knew they disapproved of him answering what they judge to be low quality questions but I dispute that their need to impede the activity of others is supported by a majority of users. I also think it is hostile to new users, to impede their use of the site.
The asker/answerers on the other hand, do NOTHING to impede the curators. Poor quality material is VERY effectively suppressed by the upvote/down vote system, without the need for closure, deletion and user bans.