This comes up a lot for questions that are closed as not being related to software development. (What triggered the question was some of the answers for the Are Marketing Questions On Topic question on meta.
It seems to me that there is a logical problem here - many things might be specific to programmers, but probably usually aren't very, but you don't know that without knowing the answer to the question. For example, questions about specific marketing tactics (in this case swag). But it's also an issue for most work environment questions (which I'm willing to stipulate mostly aren't good questions) and pretty common for career questions.
But presumably the person asking doesn't know if this is true, or they wouldn't ask. And people closing the question might not know of any reason programmers are different than the rest of the world for attribute X, but it's hard to prove a negative, since a single valid example invalidates it.
For example, what if someone happens to answer a post saying that their recently completed research has found that programmers have a uniquely strong response to swag, but only in blue packaging? Or that they have ranked all professions by correlation between ambient noise and productivity, and programmers have the highest negative correlation of all occupations, including brain surgeons and orchestra conductors? (Or, to the probable joy of several recent posters, that a gene has been found that greatly increases programming ability but makes the bearer social awkward and physically repulsive?)
In practice, most questions closed as not being specific to programmers probably really aren't specific to programmers, or are only slightly so, but then what should the policy be? Should they just be closed on the theory that anybody with reasonable evidence that it is specific to programmers will be able to get it re-opened?