Questions are often answered in a slightly teacher like fashion based on a feeling of deeper understanding of the answering person. That is definitely useful in many cases, but also often annoying. Simple things are usually already comprehensively answered, so it is easy to come up with a question provoking that.
A hard question favors simple answers like "You should not do ... use ... instead", "it is no good style to ..." and similiar. It is hard to get the answer to the precisely asked question, and not an answer trying to redefine the question to something more obvious.
If the proposed alternatives prove useful it maybe seems still ok to give up votes; if the proposed alternatives don't prove useful due to not mentioned circumstances, it doesn't seems OK to give down votes.
One could edit the question, excluding the seemingly easy answers, leading to a growing thread of excuses why the question should be answered as-is and not replaced by another one.
What are your thoughts about?