Two major differences come to mind immediately:
The first difference: In the Rio question, the location being asked about is of the appropriate level of specificity (a city) to be identifiable from the image (which shows a city). The variations in geography shown in the image also provide an appropriate level of information to make the additional question (the approximate location the image was taken from) reasonably answerable. I don't remember the "south east asia seaside golf course" question you mentioned, but I do remember another golf course question asked by - I'm quite certain, given your interest - the same person. Let's take that for comparison: it wanted us to locate a point somewhere vaguely near a city (not shown in the image), based on a photograph of a fireplace that happened to have some distant mountains in the background. Quite a big difference.
As I said, I don't think I saw the specific golf course question you're asking about. But based on your description of the seaside golf course picture sounds like it was probably a similarly unsuitable image with few or no distinctive, recognisable features. As a result, a request to identify the specific location within the absurdly large stated area "south east asia" would be nothing other than a wild goose chase.
The second difference: (and, perhaps, the more important one) is that the Rio question was asked by a user who seems to be legitimate. The golf course question was asked by an obvious sockpuppet who keeps using various accounts to ask the same stupid "I found this photo on reddit, there are probably dozens or even hundreds of other spots in the general area that look basically the same, but tell me the exact location of this one somehow, for some reason" question over and over. Then they act surprised that each one gets the same negative reaction as the ones before it, as if doing the same thing over and over is somehow supposed to produce different results. And then they come to meta with yet another account. An account that has done almost literally nothing in its entire history, except argue in bad faith (while pretending to be a disinterested third party) about those questions. For some reason they still seem to think they're being subtle about this, despite the fact that: a) numerous meta posts from various users make it clear that everybody sees through them, and b) I've personally told them directly at least three times now that they aren't. Frankly it's insulting how stupid "they" must think we are.