I answer questions based on my capability to provide adequate and meaningful answers to them.
There are so many factors I use when deciding on a question to answer.
1. It must be a very clear question: There are some questions that are very confusing. You can't even figure out what the question or answer will be. The questioner just goes on and on blabbing without getting to ask any meaningful question. I immediately skip those kind of questions.
2. Must be interesting. I can't answer a boring question. I love questions that are very interesting to answer. Because I'm a very interesting person, I can provide interesting answers to these questions. So answering a question because it is interesting.
3. Must be on my niche. I have my niche and I'd discuss that in my next point. But that doesn't not mean I completely ignore questions outside my niche. It only means, I'd rather answer a question in my niche than answer a general question.
4. Related to life or relationship. Yeah, you got that right. That's basically my niche. If the question has to do with life or relationship, then I am likely to answer and even enjoy answering that question.
I consider simple rhetoric. Most of the time, specifically pertinence.
On the one hand, I always check the interest of the question, the point. Sometimes questions have a perlocutionary force which differs from their ilocutionary force, like when somebody asks you, “Can you tell me what time it is?” Its ilocutionary force demands a yes/no answer (because it is a yes/no question in terms of grammar), but its perlocutionary force is a requests: to know what time it is. Some people are really clumsy or really cunning at the moment they ask their questions; one must be smart, so nobody gets frustrated or gets to manipulate us.
On the other hand, If I think it is none of their business, I question back (i.e. What do you need to know that for?). If I think it is none of my business, I tell them they should ask the right person.
There are complex questions, too. A “complex question” is a logical fallacy: Somebody asks you, “Are you crazy or just an idiot?” What are your choices, right?
I think the important thing is to preserve the principle of efficiency of any kind of communication: economy. Answer what will solve the most relevant doubt at the moment. That is the principle of pertinence. E.g. A person asks you what you’re doing later because they want to go with you on a date. What is the most relevant doubt? The inviter wants to know if you are free so you can go out, but maybe you don’t want to go on a date with this person even though you’re free, so the doubt you have to clarify is whether you are available or not for a date with such person. Be the last case your case, one good answer to do would be: “Probably I am not doing anything special this afternoon, and I want to keep it that way.” Most relevant doubt—and true question—solved!
1. If I know very well about the fact.
2. If have find it valuable or interesting to be answered.
3. I like life related questions, it helps me to think in many ways.
4. If there are already more than five question, I make it a thought that the questioner already get what he is looking for. There is no need to further adding something.
5. If I find something I would love to answer, I go through the answers whether there is already exist what I wanted to tell. If not then I try to add my answer.
If i like the question, or think i may have something intelligent to say or share a perspective, i answer them. I specially want to answer questions that are regressive (men cooking, marriage for sex etc. ) and those that are about religion. My favourite questions are on finance and investing and i answer all of those given my background.
If I feel that I know something about the question being asked then I answer.
I answer questions base on my knowledge about that question.
So before I answer a particular question, I must confirm if the question is not repeated, sometimes I see one question twice, before I go into answering it.
The question must be reasonable, I dont answer unreasonable questions.
I must love the question, l love to answer questions on love, relationship or on marriage. These kind of questions draws my attention alot.
I must understand the question before answering.
Then I'll answer.
If i can read it, i can answer it. Whats desnt mean, i want to answer it ;)
1....i first of all analyze if the question is under a subject matter which i have enough knowledge about...
2..i also would analyze if the question is the type of question that will require some facts and evidences,if i do not have enough evidence to back up my answer then i would not attempt such questions....
3...i also analyze to see if the question itself is interesting and is question that would demand answers that would be educating and also informative....
4...i also tend to check if the question is not asked by a spammer,the reason is because i believe the spammer do not actually need my responses,all he or she is just looking for is upvotes,,answering questions from a spammer makes me feel like i am wasting my time...
Well, there are different techiques in analyzing a question. But let me share a few of mine. First of all i only give answers to question that capable of tackling. We can't just give answers to questions we know nothing about, you must at lease have a hint or clue of what the question demands.
secondly i go for questions that are simple and clear, well the simpler the question is, the easier the answer will come.
Thirdly, I go for exciting and meaningful questions. If the question is interesting and capable of adding more knowledge to me in the process, then i would'nt hesitate to give it a shot.
Also if the question is logical and involves brainstorming....then its even better, i love anything that makes me think outside the box.
Finally, i love questions that helps me apply life lessons and personal views.....this is a way of giving me a voice on a platform of expression.