Let's start with an example of two questions (on of course involving one downvoted question of mine...) https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29049160/how-to-refactor-variable-names-in-the-stata-do-file-editor and Consequences of the Inverse Galois Problem. The one deals with code refactoring on a programming Q&A, the other with the "Inverse Galois Problem" on a math Q&A. In one (my) question the explanation of the technical term "Refactoring" was requested in the other not while both are clearly centered around a technical term - and you'd never think about asking what the "Inverse Galois Problem" is in a comment rather than checking for yourself on wikipedia, right?
Why would a person who does not understand a technical term want to engage in a question which is clearly centered around it and absolutely requires knowledge about the technical term? That wouldn't make any sense for both the person trying to answer the question because he_she'd have to learn what the OP knows and more to answer the question and the person asking the question because the chances of getting a useful reply from a person which knows less about the problem than the OP is fairly low. There's no point in increasing the readability of the question for people who are neither the OP nor engaged in the question in any way neither because no one can complain about someone asking a question using technical terms - those should be banned from SE sites otherwise. If you don't know the term your possibilities to contribute an answer or any other content to the question is practically zero (while non-content contribution like editing and flagging are possible, of course).
Where to draw the line? When to enforce an explanation of a technical term - be it with a bunch of downvotes or a constructive comment? Is there a different handling of (descriptions of) technical terms on SE sites which are targeting professionals explicitly and other SE sites?