Is it okay to ask a question about clarifying the rules, given that the table accepts a specific interpretation of an ambiguous rule?

Question

In a lot of cases, the answers on this site do not make it especially clear which interpretation of a specific rule should be used. Here's a simple example – these two dnd-5e questions about whether you can fly using a Mage Hand both have competing answers: (1) yes, and (2) no, because you Mage Hand only interacts with objects. While the "yes" answer is more upvoted in each case, the upvote difference is fairly small so I don't consider the answers and votes to form an especially clear consensus.

Voting is used to resolve the kinds of discrepancies in this example, but in the absence of a clearly resolved consensus, is there anything wrong with opening a question that goes like this, "At our table, we accept answer 2, and, given that context, what are the rules about picking up a box that contains a creature?"

• Are there guidelines around this kind of conditional question?
• Is there a point at which such a question should not be asked because the consensus to the existing questions are too far against the conditional assumption?

To be clear, I'm not asking about questions like this: "Given this home-brew rule at our table that is clearly in conflict with the official rules, how should we interpret the official rules?" (which I assume would be closed as opinion-based?) – I'm asking about questions where it isn't clear whether the home-brew rule is or is not in violation of the existing rules.

Answer 1

These should work

I don't have any examples to hand (I'd welcome them in comments), but questions which accept a specific ruling, or which has a specific house rule (up to homebrew subsystem), and ask about a specific rules interaction have worked as long as the rule or ruling is sufficiently clear (and there's a lot of judgement as to what is sufficient).

Answer 2

Here is an example of such a question:

How can I bind a draconic spirit?

This is what I said:

Whether the combination of summoning/conjuring and binding works isn't the question; the GM has ruled that it does. Likewise, the issue of concentration isn't the question; the GM has ruled in that regard also.

This was pretty useful in not spawning debate on what wasn't in question.