The question was a provocative story, complete with plot, named characters, and motivations. We've been getting a lot of these, as site regulars will have noticed. Our site isn't for getting scintillating, fantastical tales onto the hot list; it's for getting answers to questions people actually have.
Often the actual questions are fairly straightforward or even boring. How do I handle a hit & run fender-bender? What do I do about a slacker coworker? How do I give credit to a junior colleague without calling my own abilities into question? But the problems arise when these questions are packaged up in descriptions that are fanciful, filled with colorful characters and intriguing but utterly irrelevant detail. Lots of detail. Worldbuilding-levels of detail. People then respond, in comments and answers, to the detail, in the process losing the pearl of the actual question in the vast dunes of sand that are all that other stuff. The top answer to this question falls into that trap, and you can tell from the voting that people love a good smackdown -- but that doesn't make it a good answer whose presence protects the original tale.
When we see stuff like that, our first instinct should be to edit the question to fix the problem, not to rush to get answers in before the inevitable entry to the hot list and free rep (the more blunt or snarky the answer, the more rep). This is Stack Exchange, not Youtube; we're here for answers to questions, not entertainment. By failing to fix questions like these, we are failing the people with real problems who come here looking for answers, and at the same time providing precedent for trolls who just want to waste our time.
If the OP is trying to solve a problem, my edit makes it more likely that answers to the real question will emerge. If the OP is trying to do something else, we don't need to support it.
In response to complaints, I have made a further edit to bring back some details about the OP's behavior (the timing, in particular). I have also edited that answer, because the fact that an answer quoted stuff that wasn't needed (like the part about "I can't believe I need to ask this") does not obligate us to keep that text forever. My original edit didn't invalidate the answer -- the answer is "no, don't do that, and stop bothering your coworker" -- it only removed context for some other stuff the answerer also chose to talk about. I've fixed that now.
We've had discussions before about aggressive edits. Sometimes they are necessary. Questions with this problem have been deleted (sometimes by community managers, not just moderators) when they were beyond repair. An edit to fix a broken question is far better than deleting the whole thing.