This meta-query focuses on my (user2661923) answer to the following link, Solving $3\cos x+4\sin x = \frac52$, as well as the subsequent comment that my answer triggered.
I encountered a mathSE query that someone else had already provided an answer to. I both liked the already provided answer and felt that I could not improve upon it. At the same time, I felt that there were still questions that needed to be addressed; that is, I felt that it would be beneficial to the OP to address these questions.
This purpose of this meta-query is to give mathSE reviewers the opportunity to express their opinions; in the circumstances that I encountered, was my answer to the original mathSE query appropriate?
If most of you feel that it was not appropriate, then, in future similar situations, I will not post such an answer. Alternative, if you feel that my answer was appropriate, then I will continue to post such answers.
By the way; some of the reactions to this meta-query have convinced me that both the title of the meta-query and the meta-query itself should be revised. Therefore, I've revised the meta-query + title.
I infer from some of the reactions to this meta-query, that my response to the original mathSE query would have been more appropriate as a comment rather than an answer. I agree. Despite that, I posted my response as an answer, simply because I thought it would make my response significantly more legible.
Recent comments discuss the use of a blog:
link = Community Blog FAQ
I have mixed feelings about relating it specifically to this meta-query.
On the one hand:
Questions on main usually lead to objective, clear, closed-ended answers. ...Expository articles, perhaps detailing how to approach a style of problems, ..., belong on the blog.
On the other hand:
How long does it take for an article to be published after it's written? ... the queue is about one month (re, as of 7-25-2014).
In the underlying mathSE query, Yves Daoust' criticizing comment was upvoted to 5.
In this meta-query:
postmortes' 1st comment was upvoted to 8.
The meta-query itself was first upvoted to 2 and then downvoted back to 0.
The meta-query's pseudo-answer was downvoted.
Although some reviewers approved of my answer to the underlying mathSE query, it seems to me that most did not. I will be guided by this majority view.