Do we want long comprehensive answers to questions on stackoverflow?
Is it better to spend 30 secs to write "look this up [insert link here]", or do we want people to take their time (maybe an hour! maybe more!) to write a more comprehensive and detailed answer?
I've seen people make comments like these on highly voted short answers:
- "+1; this is why i love stackoverflow! answers are short and to the point!"
- "+1; beat me to it!" (because it's all about quickness?)
And some of my long answers have been:
- Downvoted (Was it too long? All pole and no fish? Was there a minor technical mistake somewhere? Too many quotes from references and/or books and not enough original material? Was the answer not entertaining enough because it's all business and no personality, since I refrain from making jokes, using smilies, or injecting personal opinions/anecdotes?)
- Commented with "who has the time to read this???" etc
- Unrewarded with regards to votes
I've only been on stackoverflow for a few months, so I'm still trying to figure out what kind of answers the community wants (as evidenced by their votes), what kind of answers the owners want (as laid out in their vision), and what kind of answers I want (yes, I can have my own vision too!), and how best to reconcile the differences that may exist between them, so any guidance is appreciated.