One of the things I have noticed is that having a request closed when you aren't done discussing an issue feels kind of like having a door slammed in your face, or someone walking away when you're still trying to talk to them. For me, at least, that's the most frustrating feeling.
Probably this was/is not intentional. Often what happens is that a report hangs open for a couple of days, there's no response from the player, then the staffer closes it up because s/he assumes dialogue is complete. If you don't feel dialogue was complete, there's no reason not to politely open it back up again in another request. No one on staff will be offended by a player doing this, assuming the prior result wasn't something along the lines of, "Discussion on this topic is closed."
We don't psychically know that the player doesn't feel something is resolved if that's not said. Players with extreme frequency will just not respond to staff comments, and so...we close things up. We can't see in the request tool the difference between "player hasn't responded because s/he is busy at work for a few days," or "player hasn't responded because s/he is satisfied." We have a workload that we're churning through and requests will sometimes get closed up when they maybe shouldn't be yet, but that's not personal.
Here is an edit of some advice I recently gave to a player of a noble specifically about communication:
-- Frequency of reports is requested to be once a week. Clan-related question/requests can be sent in for urgent issues between reports. (But please use sparingly.)
-- Watch formatting in reports. Bullet points are helpful; very long paragraphs are not helpful. Liberal use of bold is not good, judicious use of bold is good.
-- Sometimes reports have a lot of detailed information but we can't really tell what the point is. Is it just information? Are we supposed to take action? The new leader format reports have helped with this, but it's something to remain aware of.
-- Distinguishing in reports between IC and OOC character thoughts and actions is very helpful. It's helpful to us especially to know whether frustration is IC or OOC, or both.
-- Using much more think and feel in game is helpful. There are many instances when we are left wondering, "Does the character really believe this? Is this a lie? What is going on here?" Think and feel help staff understand what you're doing.
-- Operating from a baseline belief that "what is happening in game is IC, not OOC" is helpful to your play. Often, situations are 100% created by the PCs involved. It is very frustrating staff-side to get blamed for situations that PCs have created, and tends to result in us spending a lot of time problem-solving and soothing ruffled OOC feathers, which isn't a productive use of our time.
-- Sometimes you may ask to be able to do things that we give you the go-ahead to try doing, and then other players will not be interested. This may frustrate you, and it may be tempting to perceive it as a staff-side issue when it is not. There is nothing we can do to make players participate in things they are not interested in participating in.
-- Sometimes you may ask to do things that would require a large investment of staff time, and when we say no, become frustrated. We do not say no to player initiatives whimsically; we have good reasons for doing so. If we don't have the time to do something, then you need to trust that that is the truth and isn't because we don't want to, or because we aren't working hard enough.
-- Participating in staff-led plots is part of what sponsored roles are expected to do when we run them. If you don't like staff-led plots, then you probably will be frustrated at this requirement, and may want to re-think playing this role or find a way to become comfortable with it. Sponsored roles are not just about getting to do what feels fun or productive to you personally, they are also about cooperating and teaming up with staff to bring forth an outcome for the game.