My most serious issue with this is I'm not sure who the "we" in "we should answer these" is.
In practice, currently most questions which should by letter of that law be closed are left open. I do most of the closing, and I'm aware that this may appear inconsistent. I see the purpose of the rules as allowing us the discretion of closing questions as off-topic. By analogy, cops at speed traps generally do not pull over everyone exceeding the speed limit by two miles an hour.
If we remove the rule, on the surface things are easier. A lot of questions can just go ignored, or -- to be frank -- get blind leading the blind type answers. However, it is not doing anyone a favor to spare them the "intimidation" they may suffer at U&L in place of allowing them to be misled or ignored.
I realize that U&L is not a perfect place either and that in addition to being intimidated, people are regularly ignored and misled there. None-the-less, we cannot pretend that we can be providing the level of help that can be provided there for questions that are on-topic there. While the raspberry pi has been very successful and perhaps introduced millions of people to linux (whether they like it or not, lol), it's an operating system likely used on 30-50%+ of the world's internet servers...95%+ of the supercomputers...etc. What's more, there's a U in U&L that covers another large swath of people with relevant expertise.
Another issue is that in opening the floodgates to stuff that would be better of somewhere else we stand to swamp the kind of stuff which is best off here.