Questions, declarations, demands

Questions are approximately statements of ignorance, but they're better at getting people to respond. Why? Consider:

S1. Declaration of ignorance
Alani: Oh no, here come's Hukov. He's such a prick.
Hukov: Hi, Alani. I don't know how the world would look if participatory consent were a socially overvalued moral construct. Idk if you know either.
Alani: Hukov, I don't care about you or what you know. Go away.

S2. Inquiry
Alani: Oh no, here comes Hukov. He's such a prick.
Hukov: Hi, Alani. What if Jesus were a raisin?
Alani: I ....hm....what if Jesus were a raisin? Let's talk this out.
...

So maybe one reason that questions are more effective than declarations of ignorance in getting an informative response is that questions, by skipping the mention of the speaker and their mental state, give the audience fewer opportunities to decide they're not interested.

Another reason is that questions are kind of like demands for answers, and people have a quick mental reaction that promotes compliance with demands.

If a demand is roughly a statement of the speaker's desire for the audience to perform a behavior, then maybe a question also encodes a little bit of a preference for the audience to respond, and a little bit of an assumption by the speaker that they have social authority to voice their preference with a reasonable expectation that the audience will comply.

Neat.