A definite stance on the use of jsfiddle as a resource for displaying code relevant to a question hasn't really been reached. We've had quite a few questions regarding this on meta but I don't think they've done much justice to the community's overall standpoint on the situation.
That being said, I'm personally all for jsfiddle, but not for using it as the only source for displaying your code. In fact, askers should utilize jsfiddle, especially if their entire code (or at least what they feels is relevant to the problem) is rather large. However, they should still always have some code in the question, whether it be a small part of the whole code that they feel may summarize the problem as best as possible, or the entire code itself in the case that it's not that huge.
When askers don't make use of (or simply aren't aware of) jsfiddle, we usually post a comment suggesting that they post a live example there for us to really get to know what the problem is (seeing the product of the 'broken' code is very helpful in identifying the problem). Sometimes I come across questions whose answers can be determined by simply looking more closely at the code, as oftentimes the simple mistakes are our downfall.
So my question is mainly how to deal with comments that suggest putting the code into a jsfiddle in cases like above, where it's not really necessary. After all, it is something of an added inconvenience to have to go to a separate site to work with the user's code.
For a quick example of what I'm talking about (although probably not a perfect one), this recent comment, I feel, suggests posting the code on jsfiddle when it's not really necessary.