Writers tutorial entry; the justification of controversies

The justification of controversies
The essence of this article is not to present a viable argument but to secure potent opinions as regard the topic of discuss, as either a writer or a wonderful reader of all creatively crafted write ups. In our stories, quite often, we are left with the option of finding an end to a mystery baffling our readers, solving puzzles and appropriating the story climax. The end result of which ever blend of these factors we incorporate into our stories is the creation of the sensation of uplifting the readers into our story realm. This would eventually create two categories of readers.
   1) Those that are completely conversant with our story world and could perfectly continue a fan fiction on your story.
   2) Those that are mildly or very lost and hence has questions to ask as regard your story realm.
The first category of readers is not our concern in this article but the other. The ending of a story most times could be controversial enough for readers to expect a sequel which to the writer truly never exist. These kind of controversial endings, are they meant to be consciously created or rather just a reflection of the reader’s comprehension capabilities?
This bring me back to the topic, the creation of controversies in a story, which were left unsolved. Is it a good attribution to any story or a flaw? If the controversy is as a result of the reader’s low comprehension ability, are we to be concerned about the existence of such readers while writing our various stories?
The conscious creation of such controversy had been justified by renowned best-selling writers who claimed it is a compelling spell that drags certain readers to the story as their inadvertent meditations towards solving or justifying the  controversies with the writer will keep them ready to read to the end to confirm if they have actually outwitted the writer.
However aren’t the same controversies without a competent resolve not enough to bore certain readers who love justice? They love to see every developments, twists, turns and conflicts resolved most judiciously before they could be satisfied with any write up. Are these set of people meant to be ignore? Isn’t a writer duty also to write what people would love to read? Isn’t a writer also meant to be able to express himself in his most natural compelling way (A writer’s voice)? If that were to be the case then, are unresolved controversies a positive to a story or a negative?
Before I round up, I will lay an example of a petty argument between me and a fellow writer. We both were reviewing a story in which one of the dubious cast was struck dead as a result of nemesis for her deeds, however this sin was committed by two, but only one received judgement. She then claimed that her death was not justified by her deeds and that the writer was too shallow in trying to justify her death by hanging it on the neck of nemesis. She was right to an extent, however, I yet asked her a question; how will a writer justify that which he does not know? What if a reader even gets to know more than the writer if he had been adequately absolved into the story realm? What if?
In conclusion, I’d love to hear the opinions of dear readers as regard this controversial aspect of creative writing. Should the premise of justifying controversies absolutely lie on the shoulder of the writer? Should it? I await your responses. Thank you for reading.
Abd-afeez Abd-hamid