Q:

Questions that appear trolling & hypothetical. 

The latest question that fits this category in my opinion is Value of credit score if you never plan to borrow again?  
The OP hasn't won the lottery, nor reached his couple million level, but asks about the value of credit and why not walk away.  Both halves of the question have been asked and answered.  And yet, 2 upvotes and a favorite tag.  
Does this question fit into our On-Topic?  Or is it a candidate for closure?  

A:

I don't find this particular one too troubling.  The scenario posed is clearly intended to be hypothetical and OP is essentially asking in a roundabout way "Is my credit rating important for reasons beyond obtaining loans?" 
I say it is valid and on-topic, plus it has a really good answer. 
The Life insurance salesman...that was a different story. 

A:

We can't all be Hemingway
And that doesn't mean they are trolling.   Looking at the intent of the person who hates being rated by a credit score, I'd categorize them as rugged individualist, not a pot-stirrer.   Whereas the whole life insurance salesman was clearly trying to undermine the site and generate business.   (There is a smaller chance that was a honest person testing his training materials, but I doubt it.) 
What I am saying is the intent of the question is about eschewing credit and living life.   The poster tried to frame it in a way that his actual question would be answered while not dealing with the unlikely nature of the circumstances.   (Perhaps they failed.) 
Which is why the answer was so good; it didn't deal with the flawed premise, only the question asked and still managed to deliver a good fundamental point about having a credit score. 
Basically, the OP didn't find that magical way of asking the question elegantly.   The question is good (if you can peer through the fog of its sentence structure).   If anything, that question could be closed as a duplicate, but I am fine with what happened. 
Poorly worded questions can still be answered
This same line applies to that insurance pitchman.   JohnFX gave a great fundamental answer to a question with a bad premise.   The pitchman was trying to sell insurance, and failed miserably in the face of facts.   (In fact, if you don't happen to agree with the pitchman that whole life is a good product,  you couldn't have asked for a better outcome.   Best thing in the world for somebody looking into whole life to find in bing searching.) 
Make the Internet better
The best solution of all is to cajole the poster into rewriting the question in a better way.   In the case of our latest lottery winner, I would have:

Asked if his question was a duplicate of X and Y or Z? 
If the OP still insists they aren't dupes, get added clarity about the premise (if it bothered me so). 
If the OP doesn't respond in a timely manner, go ahead and re-write the question with a unique angle or better clarity.