Why is it that, almost unilaterally, the highest voted questions and my favorite questions are entirely subjective questions aimed at discussions? To a T, the questions that got me interested in stack overflow and the ones that I find myself carefully reading for solid chunks of time are purely subjective and entirely discussion.
When I first came to this site, it was because I found a whole bunch of developers pooling together opinions on these really interesting questions. This site was better than any others I knew because the general prevailing opinions were immediately apparent through the well-worded highly-voted answers, with gems of insight spread throughout the discussion and brought to the first few pages by other intelligent programming people.
Honestly, if I wanted to know how to access API X in language L$, I would go find a reference book or online source; it's what I did before stack overflow and it didn't work half bad.
I see exactly two reasons why one would visit stack overflow:
1. Someone has a question that is 'strange' for some reason. Either it doesn't fit with any standard kind of documentation or the real problem is not figuring out the solution, it is figuring out how to word the question. These questions are tough, and stack overflow is great for this. There are pages of these questions, rated around +3 to +10 by the 10 people whose lives were saved by this helpful answer existing on this helpful site.
2. Someone has a question that is so fascinating and controversial it can't be answered by one person. Previously if someone wanted to know what was the best text editor in the world, there was no way to figure it out. If your question was a popular enough one you might be able to google it or discuss it in a forum, but you never would know if you weren't missing whole segments of the discussion because you picked up on the vocal authors X and Y. I sincerely doubt I ever would have gotten into stack overflow if not for the "favorite cartoon" question: one that is now closed and if it were to be asked now would be shut down within 5 minutes for being subjective and open to discussion.
Stack overflow's biggest strength in my opinion is that it has the pulse of a hundred thousand interested parties flowing through it. I personally would rather channel that into a better understanding of the enigmatic and important questions with no good answers than merely into a better understanding of why my code doesn't work. Just because a question cannot possibly have a canonical answer doesn't mean it can't hold value, and I would argue that stack overflow's unique system and user base means that it is the single best place in the world for those questions. Do you agree? Discuss!
EDIT: I suppose when I said "discussions" I didn't really mean the kind that go "Hey, I thought of something." "But did you think of this other point?" "Oh no, I didn't! Good thinking." which definitely do belong elsewhere. When I said discussions I think I meant a collection of opinions. On stack overflow these collections of opinions can be vetted and widely held views can be curried to the top. This is what I feel makes stack overflow "subjectivity" work so well.