I think SE is, by design, not at all suited to research-level questions. The idea of SE is that you can ask a quick fact question and get the correct answer. For example, "how do you define an HTML style that adds fixed text to the beginning of a span?". It is not designed for conversational exchanges.
In real linguistic research, there aren't many simple fact-oriented "answer and move on" questions. A question like "what is 'contrast'?" would at the actual level of an actual research site engender thousands of pages of answers, and is still way too broad.
I should also point out that the evaluative infrastructure (anonymous unvetted up- and down-votes) is contrary to the ideal method of academic research, although perhaps it's good if people get accustomed to the popularity-based theory of intellectual value (cf. RateMyProfessor). The problem is that people who hold unpopular beliefs have a strong disincentive to participate in a basically popularity-based website. Popularity is not the same as truth, and I think it would be important to first make clear what you are looking for, and whether you are likely to actually get it using a particular tool.
A well-structured threaded "conversational" forum is a more likely internet-based means of getting the kind of discussion that you seem to be looking for,