I see this frequently here: OP asks how to deal with a difficult social interaction, often one involving a degree of conflict, i.e. a situation in which one side wants something else than what OP wants.
Many answers, typically including the highest-voted answer, do not explain how the situation can be coped with, at all. Instead, they judge on what's morally appropriate or which party of the conflict is "in the right".
Sometimes OP's confusion partly results from not knowing what's morally appropriate, i.e. what can be expected from them. In this case, such an answer can contribute (sometimes significantly) to answer the question. But more often it doesn't. Consider this example, which practically amounts to:
- Q: How can I dismiss a stranger asking for money?
- A: You don't have to give them money!
The question isn't "can I dismiss a stranger?", but "how?". The approach thus doesn't answer the question. Since, however, in itself the answer is so obviously true, it receives the most upvotes. It is as if, when it comes to questions of morality or appropriateness, people want so badly to confirm what they think is right that they completely forget what the actual question is.
How can we deal with this? Should we consider these answers as off-topic (despite their high vote count)? Should we point this out in the comments? Should we provide some guidance on this issue in the FAQ? Or is it only OP's responsibility to point out that they are not interested in who's right in the situation?. My fear is, if we do nothing, the helpful answers will often be buried under high-voted but largely irrelevant truisms.