First, a positive observation:
After a decline in visitors/day that had the numbers dipping quite low, it bounced back a bit to 600+/day. Hopefully this ratio can continue to go up -- along with the quality of questions and answers provided.
Second, an area that continues to need work:
One can see from the proposal page that the one area in which MESE "Needs Work" is in the number of questions posted per day. I'm not sure that the recommendation of 15/day is what it takes to indicate a healthy beta, but I think that the current average (1.3/day as of Sept. 30, 2014) is definitely too low.
I think it's worth continuing (cf. Questions) to think about how we can make high-quality potential users aware of this site, and encourage them to join and post questions and/or answers.
Moreover, on the subject of questions and the prompt from this post:
Rating the questions is only a part of the puzzle, though. Do you see a pattern of questions that should have been closed but are not? Questions or answers that could use an edit? Anything that's going really well? Post an answer below to share your thoughts and discuss these questions and the site's health with your fellow users!
I think a fair number of questions would benefit greatly from better titles; cf. Answers in the previous linked meta.MESE post.
Given the rated list posted here, I'd say How can I demonstrate triangulations of surfaces with real hands-on objects? is a great title. On the other hand, to say nothing of the content, I think the fourth highest rated question has an inadequate title: Teaching math in an engaging way.
I might also note that the highest rated question, Moving From Rote Learning To Creative Thinking, may still be lacking with regard to its title, but even this version exists only because I edited over the OP's original name (back on Aug. 9) of How does one correct the influence of bad pedagogy from childhood?
Summary:
My sense is that more users with more questions remains a crucial element.
For users already here, editing question titles to add specificity might be nice.