I've only been active on StackExchange for a month or so and I've noticed a big divide between providing an answer that the user will find helpful and providing a technical answer that is correct.
As it is with most things, there is a "simple" answer to most questions and there is a "technically correct" answer that that often misses the point. I don't intend to be critical; rather I'm trying to decide whether the answers should be written from a technical point of view or an "average person" point of view.
An example is a question I replied to a few days ago regarding RAW "images". The technical answer is there's no such thing as a raw "image" - only raw data, which are interpreted as an image by whichever application you choose when viewing those data. The data can then be further interpreted using software to make adjustments so the image will appear a certain way.
However, the user was wondering whether they need to edit RAW images to make them look good. I answered the question in a way that I believed the user would understand, while still retaining enough detail to differentiate between a jpg image and a RAW file. I focused primarily on answering the question of whether the user should edit the image or not.
There was a variety of comments, most suggesting the answer is incorrect because there's no such thing as a "RAW image". The criticism is valid; however, that leads me back to my original question: Should the response be 100% technically correct (if possible), or should the response answer the user's question in terms (I assume) they would understand?