Return to Answer

Links are fantastic, but they should never be the only piece of information in your answer.

An analogy would be if you are standing at 100 Main St. and you ask where 98 Main St. is. A good answer would be:

"It is the next building over". points at building

If you instead include a link, you are saying:

"I'll direct you to a tourism information booth, and they will be able to provide you with your answer and much more!"

Which is great, however, you haven't answered their question at all, you've deferred the answering to somewhere else. And in this (fictitious) case the person has to take quite a detour to get to their destination.

When someone goes on Stack Exchange, the question "answer" should actually contain an answer. Not just a bunch of directions towards the answer.

You should provide context to all your links, otherwise the OP will have no idea what they are clicking into.

I think of all my answers on Stack Exchange as if they are technical emails to a client. And unless the client asked "Can you resend that link?" there is no excuse for sending them an official email with only links.

It's also a way of saying "I have absolutely no value beyond a search using a common search engine." Which is completely untrue, so why sell yourself short?

Linkrot is a whole other reason why "only links" is a terrible response.

Links are fantastic, but they should never be the only piece of information in your answer.

An analogy would be if you are standing at 100 Main St. and you ask where 98 Main St. is. A good answer would be:

"It is the next building over". points at building

If you instead include a link, you are saying:

"I'll direct you to a tourism information booth, and they will be able to provide you with your answer and much more!"

Which is great, however, you haven't answered their question at all, you've deferred the answering to somewhere else. And in this (fictitious) case the person has to take quite a detour to get to their destination.

When someone goes on Stack Exchange, the question "answer" should actually contain an answer. Not just a bunch of directions towards the answer.

You should provide context to all your links, otherwise the OP will have no idea what they are clicking into.

I think of all my answers on Stack Exchange as if they are technical emails to a client. And unless the client asked "Can you resend that link?" there is no excuse for sending them an official email with only links.

It's also a way of saying "I have absolutely no value beyond a search using a common search engine." Which is completely untrue, so why sell yourself short?

Link rot is a whole other reason why "only links" is a terrible response.

Links are fantastic, but they should never be the only piece of information in your answer.

An analogy would be if you are standing at 100 Main St. and you ask where 98 Main St. is. A good answer would be

"It is the next building over". points at building

If you instead include a link, you are saying

"I'll direct you to a tourism information booth, and they will be able to provide you with your answer and much more!"

Which is great, however, you haven't answered their question at all, you've deferred the answering to somewhere else. And in this (fictitious) case the person has to take quite a detour to get to their destination.

When someone goes on Stack Exchange, the question "answer" should actually contain an answer. Not just a bunch of directions towards the answer.

You should provide context to all your links, otherwise the OP will have no idea what they are clicking into.

I think of all my answers on Stack Exchange as if they are technical emails to a client. And unless the client asked "Can you resend that link?" there is no excuse for sending them an official email with only links.

It's also a way of saying "I have absolutely no value beyond a search using a common search engine." Which is completely untrue, so why sell yourself short?

Linkrot is a whole other reason why "only links" is a terrible response.

Links are fantastic, but they should never be the only piece of information in your answer.

An analogy would be if you are standing at 100 Main St. and you ask where 98 Main St. is. A good answer would be:

"It is the next building over". points at building

If you instead include a link, you are saying:

"I'll direct you to a tourism information booth, and they will be able to provide you with your answer and much more!"

Which is great, however, you haven't answered their question at all, you've deferred the answering to somewhere else. And in this (fictitious) case the person has to take quite a detour to get to their destination.

When someone goes on Stack Exchange, the question "answer" should actually contain an answer. Not just a bunch of directions towards the answer.

You should provide context to all your links, otherwise the OP will have no idea what they are clicking into.

I think of all my answers on Stack Exchange as if they are technical emails to a client. And unless the client asked "Can you resend that link?" there is no excuse for sending them an official email with only links.

It's also a way of saying "I have absolutely no value beyond a search using a common search engine." Which is completely untrue, so why sell yourself short?

Linkrot is a whole other reason why "only links" is a terrible response.

Links are fantastic, but they should never be the only piece of information in your answer.

An analogy would be if you are standing at 100 Main St. and you ask where 98 Main St. is. A good answer would be

"It is the next building over". points at building

If you instead include a link, you are saying

"I'll direct you to a tourism information booth, and they will be able to provide you with your answer and much more!"

Which is great, however, you haven't answered their question at all, you've deferred the answering to somewhere else. And in this (fictitious) case the person has to take quite a detour to get to their destination.

When someone goes on Stack Exchange, the question "answer" should actually contain an answer. Not just a bunch of directions towards the answer.

You should provide context to all your links, otherwise the OP will have no idea what they are clicking into.

I think of all my answers on Stack Exchange as if they are technical emails to a client. And unless the client asked "Can you resend that link?" there is no excuse for sending them an official email with only links.

It's also a way of saying "I have absolutely no value beyond a search using a common search engine." Which is completely untrue, so why sell yourself short?

Linkrot is a whole other reason why "only links" is a terrible response.

Links are fantastic, but they should never be the only piece of information in your answer.

An analogy would be if you are standing at 100 Main St. and you ask where 98 Main St. is. A good answer would be

"It is the next building over". points at building

If you instead include a link, you are saying

"I'll direct you to a tourism information booth, and they will be able to provide you with your answer and much more!"

Which is great, however, you haven't answered their question at all, you've deferred the answering to somewhere else. And in this (fictitious) case the person has to take quite a detour to get to their destination.

When someone goes on Stack Exchange, the question "answer" should actually contain an answer. Not just a bunch of directions towards the answer.

You should provide context to all your links, otherwise the OP will have no idea what they are clicking into.

I think of all my answers on Stack Exchange as if they are technical emails to a client. And unless the client asked "Can you resend that link?" there is no excuse for sending them an official email with only links.

It's also a way of saying "I have absolutely no value beyond a search using a common search engine." Which is completely untrue, so why sell yourself short?

Linkrot is a whole other reason why "only links" is a terrible response.