<p>At times I see that someone will provide an answer that, while not directly addressing <em>all</em> of the points in a question, will nonetheless give a good insight on something that is either partially solving the problem or is tangentially related in some way. I feel somewhat torn on these answers. On one hand, I think the commentary they provide can be very useful (for  example a question about regression assumptions where an elaborate answer is only given for the linearity assumption), but I also wonder if it should be upvoted if it doesn't address the <em>complete</em> problem. What is the correct way to consider these answers?</p>
<p>For the record, I don't mean answers where somebody answers the full question and another person will chime in with additional commentary that supplements it. I mean more for standalone answers that do not build off of others.</p>
