RE (tilly) 1: Are there questions to basic?

This brings up a related and harder question.

When someone asks a question, should you answer the question that they asked or the question that you think they should be asking? This applies because often someone asking a question really needs to know how to answer it for themselves rather than the answer to that specific question. But very often people show up saying, "I need to do this, how do I do this" when it is obvious that the fact that they want to do that indicates they should be learning about something else.

So should you answer the question asked (say how to do a soft reference) or explain why you think they should be thinking about something else? I tend to do the latter but don't really know how to draw the line. Thoughts?

Comment on RE (tilly) 1: Are there questions to basic?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(RE:)* Are there questions to basic? by turnstep (Parson) on Oct 11, 2000 at 19:47 UTC
I always try to look at the context of the question as well. I try to figure out not only what they are trying to do, but why they are doing it as well as how they are doing it. Yes, there is often a strong risk of coming across as pushy, but most people appreciate the "ancillary" help as well as the direct answer to their question. Often times this involves showing another way to do something. The best threads on this site (in my opinion) is where someone asks (or indirectly asks) "How can I do X?" Then many people all contribute different ways of doing it, some perhaps "better", some "faster", but mostly just different. Sometimes the discussion goes far afield from the original question - which is a very good thing, and one of the strengths of the monastery.	[reply]
RE: RE (tilly) 1: Are there questions to basic? by PsychoSpunk (Hermit) on Oct 11, 2000 at 22:20 UTC
I've been involved in a similar vein of discussion on a completely unrelated forum. I'm more of the inclination to answer the question as asked. But, the matter of interpretation is left to the reader. In other words, if the question is as specific as to state full requirements, then an answer is best given within those conditions. But if no requirements are given, then a good answer will involve the best interpretation. This kind of relates to something I learned in my Automata Theory course at school. If the answer isn't readily available, then redefine the question. Since programs should be able to be reduced to mathematical representations, this is perfectly legal as long as the end result was arrived at using valid operations. ALL HAIL BRAK!!!	[reply]


laziness, impatience, and hubris
	PerlMonks