Recently, whenever I found a good SFF answer I wanted to share, I realized that I might as well just share what it linked to because there was no actual content on the page.
Take Explanation of seasons in "A Song of Ice and Fire", for example. I'm able to arrive at the actual content by clicking a link in the comments and then follow another link from that page to the actual interview. There is no reason for the answer not to contain both a quote of George R. R. Martin's answer and a link to the interview. (I'd do it myself, but I'm scared of spoilers.)
The same goes for Does the intro sequence to the Game of Thrones TV series have any meaning?, only in worse because the upvotes answer doesn't actually answers anything; you have to click the link to get the actual answer.
This is bad. Really bad.
First of all, links do rot which mean that, eventually, the answer might not guide you to an answer. Thus, at that point, the answer becomes just a waste of space. Secondly, it means that SFF doesn't answer questions; it just directs you to answers. All in all, that's bad for the site.
On Skeptics, we encourage users to summarize in their post the content of important links (usually, they opt for a quote of an important is which just fine). SFF should do the same.