I ask many questions. Some of them get upvoted. Some of them get downvoted. I am not always sure of the difference in the questions that make people vote differently. What I do know, however, is that I am always willing to update my question to increase the perceived quality. Sometimes I can get this kind of feedback through asking questions in the comments, but this is not always fruitful.
Would it be helpful to have specific features or affordances that help with the process of not only labeling bad questions as bad, but also to support and encourage processes that increase the quality of said questions?
In academic publishing, from which the peer review system of SE seems to take some inspiration, feedback is always meant to improve the quality of a manuscript, even if it is rejected from the journal. You never simply get rejected, but you always get feedback as well. Would a similar mechanism be possible at SE?