The first point under "How do I ask a good question?" in Help states that:
Search, and research
Have you thoroughly searched for an answer before asking your question? Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!
However, I find that quite many questions, especially the quora-style ones driven by general curiosity, often completely lack any attempt of background research from the poster. The questions are not necessarily bad - many are interesting (but broad) and well formed - but indicate that the poster haven't gone to any trouble themselves to get a basic overview of the subject. They often appear to be spur-of-the-moment questions based on "I wonder how this works...?". This also means that the questions are not in any way framed in relation to relevant theories and subfields of biology.
At e.g. StackOverflow, questions that lack a background (e.g. previous coding attempts) are generally downvoted and/or receives many comments pointing out that posters are expected to have done some work to try to solve their problem. This is often not the case here at BioSE.
So my question is; How much should we enforce background research? Since BioSE is still in beta and is building a community and gathering questions there is probably a delicate balance between bringing in/not scaring away users, while still upholding good SE standards. Also, trivial and unresearched questions can potentially drive away specialist users.