@Ben- That is by far the most useful argument I've heard. Can you make an answer out of that?

Alrighty- I may not agree, but I have my answer. Anyone care to close this one?

Short answer: yes. If the question has faults, but is still merits an answer, there is value in that. I'm arguing that if the question is entirely poor and devoid of value, there would be no answers.

Right--that makes sense. Thanks for the link

@oded - only if your time has no value.

Maybe Meta is different in this way, and votes are entirely based off of agreement/dissent with the suggestion?

@Oded - so you're saying that the votes should only apply to the quality of the question, not the implied opinion? I thought this one was clear and constructive, yet it appears that the idea itself has resulted in down votes.

By answering the question, you took time out of your day to respond--that is a very personal investment. Even if you do not agree with the direction or content, you obviously care enough to voice an opinion on the matter, which suggests that there is value.

Just for fun: "There are no stupid questions--just stupid people" =)

Not necessarily. See the newly emphasized portion above.

How can a bad question have a good answer? The answer would not exist in absence of the question, so doesn't it stand to reason that the question has a small amount of merit?