A partial answer should be both confident and diffident. It should be confident because you think you have something worth saying that is (much) more than a comment, but it is not a full answer. It should be diffident for the same reason.
Manifestly, whatever can be said as a comment should be a comment, starting with "I agree with X" (sometimes worth saying) or "I have the same problem" (not usually worth saying). I agree also that really poor or confused questions should not be answered. Votes to close, downvoting, flagging, and commenting on what's poor or confused are among the tools provided, depending on how and why it is not a good question.
It's a good idea to flag the diffidence early on, to explain why you're posting a partial answer. Ideally you will then fend off possible comments (or thoughts) to the effect that you didn't answer the question completely, or even at all.
I can address part of the question here, namely ...
There are already excellent answers from @User1865345 and @Stephan Kolassa, but here I want to add a further perspective.
No-one has answered yet, but here are some thoughts to start a discussion.
What I have to say won't fit into comments because .... (For example, you may be posting a graph, or more mathematics or code than is easy to read in comments.)
This divides opinion, I guess, but I think it can be in order to try to widen or shift a thread because the question as posted obscures or ignores a deeper or more worthwhile question, or because there is an interesting or useful question alongside. Naturally the OP has control over whether they accept any answer, and they or others might riposte that your answer is irrelevant or marginal to the question. That's part of the risk.
Posting a partial answer carries some obligation to keep an eye on the thread to see if someone else posts a more complete and/or better answer. If that happens, there can be various options, including
leaving your partial answer, because it hasn't been superseded or it remains your view
taking what is different and summarizing it as a comment on someone else's answer
occasionally adding material as an edit to someone else's answer (best done only if you think the poster "knows" you from your contributions or direct exchanges and won't mind)
just deleting your answer.
I think tolerance for (and appreciation of) partial answers on CV goes along with a statistical culture that recognises and even celebrates the possibility of different attitudes and styles, particularly in data analysis, but also in statistical philosophy and theory. People new to statistics are often very surprised or disappointed by this, but it is part of what they may need to appreciate. CV is the site on Stack Exchange I know and like best; on Stack Overflow I often see very limited tolerance for comments or discussion, even when relevant to the question and likely to be helpful to readers.
Self-exemplifying: I didn't comment on how to vote. I just picked up on ideas so far and ideas nearby.