I sometimes write answers and deliberately leave them somewhat vague/open-ended. I do this because at times I feel that by being more specific it actually diminishes the value of the answer. If the answer is just a quote from somewhere in Rabbinic Literature (with a translation or summary so that it is understandable to English speakers) it gives the reader the ability to determine how to use it to answer the question. If I, in the answer, directly state how exactly the quote answers the question it then limits the answer to the specific interpretation that I stated. There might also be times when I'm not sure exactly how it answers the question, yet I still know that it is relevant.
So, is it ever valid to write such an answer and allow the readers to decide how it answers the question, or should I always put as much information into the answer as possible even if it might then limit the scope of the answer.
There are several examples of such answers that come to mind, such as this, this, this, this, and this. Most of these types of answers generate comments stating that the answer does not answer the question, or asking for further clarification as to how it answers the question. I often respond with more information in the comments, and sometimes feel pressured to edit the clarifications into the answer, even when I fell that it hurts the answer.
For the record, in the above examples three of the answers have positive scores, one has a neutral score, and one has a negative score, indicating that at least some people find them useful.
So what do people think is the best way to answer questions?
Note, I am not looking for discussions about the particular examples. I am asking about the general concept, and those just happen to be some of the cases where this happened.