Dislcaimer: I left the first comment mentioned in the Meta question, and cast the first close vote.
In hindsight, I'd rather have VTC'd as "Too broad," which is a slight nuance on essentially the same idea. I initially VTC'd as a list question because I saw the bit that said "Are there any..." and didn't see the "I'm not looking for a list." That's on me. However, I didn't retract my vote because I do believe your question should have been closed.
I want to point out right now that I genuinely do think you asked an interesting question; it's one I'd love to see answered, if only to satisfy my own bizarre curiosity. However, interesting is not the same as good, at least not within the SE context.
Now, moving on.
The problem with "Is there a..." questions
The trouble I have with questions of this type, as I mentioned in a subsequent comment on your question, is that you're inviting a situation of "Me too!" answers; users adding one more (legitimate) example just because they remembered one1.
Obviously most types of questions that suffer from this problem: story-identification and "first-of" questions being more notable for it. The difference is that those classes of question have objective answers; story-identification questions can (usually) be positively identified by the OP, and we don't have the technology to create an earlier example of a given work. "Is there a..." questions usually don't.
You can actually see the problem in the Star Trek question you link to; there are six answers, all of which are perfectly legitimate answers to the question. Which one is "correct"? All of them. How do you choose which one is correct? Maybe by quality, which is intensely subjective, or either arbitrarily or by who answered first, both of which are kind of icky.
This is the reason you were advised to modify your question to "First occurrence of...". While this may seem a little weaselly (frankly, it is a little weaselly), it does give us a reasonable way to stem the tide of "Me too" answers.
The Star Trek question
The existence of undesireable questions isn't a reason to post more undesireable questions. If you think there's a discrepancy between how your question was handled compared to another question, you should do one or both of the following:
- Post to Meta. Which you did, which is good. This is a conversation we should be having.
- Flag or VTC the other question. Obviously flag/vote in a way that's commensurate with your values. But if you feel like your question is bad and that Star Trek question is bad for the same reasons, flag
Likewise, that a question is highly-upvoted does not make it a good question. As an example, Could the Enterprise beam a vampire into a house she didn’t have permission to enter?, the highest-scored closed question, has a score of 107. It was initially closed as "Not constructive", but still falls foul of our "Gorilla vs. Shark" policies.
Unfortunately, we're not always as diligent as we could be. We're only human2, it happens. If you see one in the wild, flag it. Or go to Meta and ask about it.
Personally I'm not fussed on the question, but I'm withholding my close vote for the moment. The community seems to have drawn a distinction between questions about a specific universe (Star Trek, in this case), which is reasonably finite and relatively slow-growing,and the science fiction genre as a whole, which is enormous and growing rapidly. I'm not sure of my position on that yet, and personally I hope this question opens that debate up a bit more.
1 I realize this isn't exactly what the phrase "'Me too' answer" means elsewhere on the network, but I use it this way because I've seen others do so and I haven't come up with a better phrase for it
2 For now...