Forgive me for being a little harsh on that one, but this is at least the fifth
"Is JLU too un/friendly to X" question in this site's short existence. And even the first one could have probably been done without.
As you point out yourself, practically all these issues are part of Stack Exchange's own format. The bottom line is that you do not decide who posts or who answers and how they do it, as long as basic guidelines are followed (and they are).
While there is nothing wrong with suggesting what sort of content should be on JLU, this type of rain incantation does little to help... If you have ideas for good questions, then go ahead and post the questions! It has been pointed numerous times that all types of relevant questions, including those for which you know the answer, are fine, so feel free to start posting "word of the day" questions (but you will quickly realise that it's a lot less easy than it sounds to find proper JLU questions around a single word, on a daily basis).
The truth is that there is a natural bias against beginners on Stack Exchange and JLU in particular, for two simple reasons:
There is, by definition, a rather limited set of true "beginner" questions: you will find that most of these have already been posted and answered on JLU. Once these are asked, there is no re-asking, so current questions will naturally veer toward newer, more advanced topics.
JLU is extremely SEO-unfriendly. Question titles do not get properly encoded in URL, most likely resulting in poor ranking on search engines (and lower view counts). This has been raised already and is entirely SO's problem.
Neither of these two points are directly addressable by us, so better stop flailing and concentrate on posting the best questions and answers that we can. You cannot wish types of users or questions into existence, merely do your best to make such users/questions feel at home on JLU (and I don't know that a single "student" question on JLU has ever been treated unfairly). In the meantime, I really do not see the point of these Meta debates (if half their energy was spent actually asking questions to the authors' liking, there probably wouldn't be a need for them).
The only point I agree can use some immediate work, is the furigana issue, and it has already been tackled specifically in its own question (and while I am personally unsatisfied with the consensus that came out of it, any further discussion should probably happen there, not here).