Often times, users on this page will ask about how to evaluate this or that limit without using L'Hospital's rule.
Lately, these questions are tagged (more and more, although mostly by editors, but hey, that's a start) with the tag limits-without-lhospital to differentiate them from "regular" limit questions. And the questions get their share of answers (or close votes, depending on the quality).
However, the problem is that a vast majority of answers, at least by my experience, tend to use Taylor's expansion to quickly evaluate the limit. The example can be seen here:
I believe that answering a question where L'Hospital is not to be used by using Taylor's formula is cheating and not useful to the OP, and I therefore downvote all answers using Taylor. It is like being forbidden to use pistols in a duel, and then bringing a cannon to the match. Taylor's expansion, if it works, does the exact same thing as L'Hospital's rule, i.e. it replaces calculating $f/g$ with $f'/g'$.
What's worse, usually (not in the example I provide), authors of answes are usually pretty angry at the downvotes, claiming "this works, why would you downvote?" and not accepting my explanation at all.
My question is this:
Do you agree that answers using Taylor's expansion for limits without L'Hospital are not useful (and it is therefore correct to downvote them)?