There is an ever ongoing debate on what is on topic and what is off topic. An example of such a debate is regarding allowing / denying expats/immigrants questions on travel.se. The basic reply for those who are against widening the scope, is that everybody has the power to propose a stack exchange platform on area 51.
I think that this is both a valid point as much as it doesn't make sense. The power of stack exchange is the speed in which questions get answered. Having to first apply democratic principles on getting your question answered, does not add speed to getting your question answered.
I am still in favor of allowing expat questions, but I understand the negative sound these topic start creating and as such we should just go with the flow and deny those questions entry (pun intended). Especially since there appears to be an alternative, which is quora. I have heard about quora in the past, but never thought about spending time on it. The stack exchange platform was serving my information needs. I say "was serving", because lately it became apparent that you need to put a lot more effort in deciding if something will fit the "community". The expat/immigration anti bias on this platform being a nice example, but it applies to various other se platforms. You just need to understand the "vibes" of a se-platform to use it efficiently. On another example is that on some se platform not having googled your question before asking a question is a big "no no", where as making a sarcastic lmgtfy comment on another is considered not begin nice.
To be clear I am not saying that this necessarily is a bad thing. I am only wondering that in case certain type of questions are unacceptable, sites like quora.com fill the void. Given this void, I see no ethical objection in pointing people to competing efforts.
However, by pointing people to quora, they might start asking questions on quora that would be valid travel questions on travel.se. So pointing people to quora might actually hurt travel.se in the long run.