6

Some answers (and even some questions) are phrased very conversationally (example). I prefer less talk and more pure facts. I understand and respect other people's way and I haven't voted or commented about this; that would not be fair or even objective. But it's something to discuss here on meta.

Clarification: I absolutely agree that long answers can be necessary, and with a top summary they're often awesome. What I meant was not the length of the posts but their style. I understand that users want to add their personal touch. I feel that conversational fillers like "Hope this could help man." dilutes the quality, but maybe it's just me.

What arguments are there for a conversational style?
What arguments are there against a conversational style?
What arguments are there for a factual style?
What arguments are there against a factual style?

Do we collectively want to encourage one kind over the other, or simply let it happen naturally?

| |
5

For me, a big part of quality is the density of information presented. So, conversational presentation (such as an anecdote that illustrates a point) is a plus, but empty conversational fillers such as "hope this helps" or "don't you love when kids do stuff like that?" should be edited out whenever they are found, to keep the reference more straightforward.

| |
3

Short answers are easier to read. Long answers may not be fully read but give a lot more detail and can do a much better job of answering the question.

If an answer is going to be long it should at least have a quick recap at the top or bottom to get the best of both worlds.

| |
  • 1
    I fully agree! I edited my question to clarify that I was aiming at the style of the posts. – Torben Gundtofte-Bruun Apr 1 '11 at 6:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .