I think the situation remains much the same: we primarily need more questions per day.
The activity we see in the question feed doesn't always reflect it, but our overall site traffic has been steadily increasing over time at a pretty impressive rate. We still see the occasional spikes in traffic when a particularly popular question gets posted/tweeted/shared, but even ignoring the spikes, we've had just a really good, and consistent, increase in overall new visits to the site.
What's more, the more content we have, the more often we show up in searches like Google, so it really should just continue to snowball.
So my general feeling at this point is "we need to keep doing what we've been doing."
I'll also quote from Tim Post's answer when I asked about how to follow up on a previous Community Evaluation:
I'm quite convinced that this site would finally reach a huge success if it just had a few well respected evangelists promoting it. I'm not talking Oprah caliber, just parents that have a substantial following. Who are these people, and how do we get them to notice us? If we come up with those answers, then we've come up with half a plan. The other half is discussing the idea of what people could ask here, if they're not really comfortable asking about the real world problems that they face.
We had a related discussion about identifying said evangelists, which I encourage everyone to check out and participate in (there were some sidebar discussions in that thread that point out some potential issues/problems, as well).
I would also like to address Beansa's answer here:
First off, thank you very much for the candid feedback! It really does help us understand the perspective of newer users.
I can certainly understand your confusion over the Community Evaluation results. In all honesty, I don't really know how to answer some of your questions. While I see potential value in the process, I feel like it needs some clearer guidelines to really explain what the results mean. I would think that trying to improve the questions would certainly be a good thing, but in all honesty, I'm not sure how some of the questions that received a negative score could be improved (especially since I believe I scored one of them as at least "satisfactory").
I can also understand why our meta would be a bit intimidating. It is easy, I think, for new users to miss it entirely, and it probably isn't intuitively obvious what it is for.
Any suggestions you can make for how we can make it more welcoming would certainly be... welcome. Even any insight you could offer as to specific reasons why it feels unwelcoming or intimidating would be helpful.
I know that lately I haven't been as active as I had in the past. That's due to a combination of things, ranging from being busy in "real life", to feeling like maybe I should step back a bit to encourage other people to participate more. I have to admit that I also have been participating less on meta because I'm feeling a bit burned out, as so many of the things we've tried to help this site progress seem to have not produced the results I had hoped for.
I can also easily see how it seems like much of the content on meta is directed at the moderators, since it seems rare to have people aside from the moderators or community team respond to questions. I would love to see a change to that trend!
So, really, the best I can think of at the moment by way of suggestion is: post more stuff on meta! The more questions and answers, and overall activity, we see here, the more I think it will help make the purpose of meta clearer, and the community in general seem more open and friendly (I hope!).