CW in this case being used to "cover" a non-answer to interfere with proper answers
EDIT - a new case
For posterity: Comment against question
@Richard aka cyberkiwi: Take up the "to CW or not to CW" issue on meta - the functionality exists, get over it. You're not a mod, not even close, so don't waste your time telling me how things should be done. – OMG Ponies 1 min ago
This came up due to the comment thread against an answer to the question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5319112
For posterity: Comments against answer
That's a comment (which I'd vote for), not an answer (which I won't vote for, and recommend CW'ing or deleting before someone downvotes you). – OMG Ponies 17 mins ago
@OMG CW does not save a "not an answer". If it is not an answer, it is not, whether CW or not. Let's not start putting comments as answers and masquerade them under CW banner. – Richard aka cyberkiwi
See answer here:
Change sort in SQLite
It was entered as a CW. I'm not sure if the author believes the answer to be correct, but I am about to investigate a way to do it properly using the data posted.
I read on some meta posts recently about people using comments because they won't take the rep burn if they get it wrong. Other reasons for using comments is that they are not really sure, but feel they should impart their partial knowledge.
What does the community think? Is there a policy or how do you feel about this?