On larger, older sites in the network, I've seen some users scolding other users for answering questions that, apparently, ought not be answered. There's a strong movement on Stack Overflow in particular to oppose what some call "help vampires" (a term that I personally find unnecessarily antagonistic) by punishing users who offer "undeserved" answers.
If our aim is to maximize the happiness and enjoyment of answerers—and I think that's a productive goal—then I see no point in discouraging expert users from providing an answer that seems like far more than a question deserves.
If the answer is really that great, and the asker is satisfied, we have a growing and committed community of engineers and engineering enthusiasts who are willing and able, understand the Stack Exchange model well enough, to edit the question into something more useful (and more deserving). So the person who asked a lazy question earns some reputation, so what? Reputation is a heuristic with plenty of flaws, that's why we've got community moderation and human exception handlers instead of a fully automated system.
If the question is hopelessly off-topic, though, even an amazing, genius answer will probably end up being deleted along with the question itself. So when playing the role of the expert who contributes quality answers, you have to ask yourself:
- Am I prepared to put time and effort into this answer, even if I don't end up earning reputation, badges or other cool incentives?
- Am I prepared to work with the author of the question to make it more deserving of my pearls of wisdom (and more likely to persist on the site)?
- If this question gets edited, and the requirements change, or my answer for whatever reason starts getting downvoted, am I willing to rewrite or withdraw it?
- If this question gets nuked, and my answer with it, is that a problem for me?
Some folks have personal blogs or other sites where they contribute content. These folks may choose to salvage their deleted content by posting it elsewhere, or even to leave more cursory answers in response to more cursory questions and then write up something more polished to share in another format.
In my mind this all boils down to: if the question gets nuked and/or your answer gets downvoted, will you feel like you wasted your time?
As a contributor to this site, your potential future input is almost certainly worth more than your input to date. So I would recommend maintaining your own will to continue by being selective about when and where you do your best work. If you're one of those users who can just pump out answer after beautiful answer, you just love sharing your knowledge and you don't care what happens to it after you put it out there, more power to you. Haters gonna hate.
Personally, I am not one of those people. I have a limited amount of time to contribute answers. I will get frustrated and disengaged if I put a significant amount of time into writing something up and it gets deleted.
The point is, this is your decision to make. It does not prevent us from curating the site effectively.