user27157: I've been seeing this trend where people, who post questions that are related to problems with their code, just post the part of their code that they think is "pertinent" for the public. How should I respond to that? It's getting quite annoying and I don't know if any of you are seeing this too. 

user10794: It's a well-known problem. I set up a web site a while ago: Snippets R Us! to address this issue.
I've seen plenty of times a post that "this must be the problem" (posting a couple of lines of code) and "this can't possibly be the problem" (omitting a whole lot of code).
A useful comment you can make is:

Please post a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example

The Snippets R Us site tries to explain why this is a good idea. Often narrowing down the problem to a small example clarifies in the poster's mind what the issue is, and isn't.

27157: <p>I've been seeing this trend where people, who post questions that are related to problems with their code, just post the part of their code that they think is "pertinent" for the public. How should I respond to that? It's getting quite annoying and I don't know if any of you are seeing this too. </p>
 10794: <p>It's a well-known problem. I set up a web site a while ago: <a href="http://snippets-r-us.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Snippets R Us!</a> to address this issue.</p>

<p>I've seen plenty of times a post that "this must be the problem" (posting a couple of lines of code) and "this can't possibly be the problem" (omitting a whole lot of code).</p>

<p>A useful comment you can make is:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Please post a <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/help/mcve">Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example</a></p>
</blockquote>

<p>The <em>Snippets R Us</em> site tries to explain why this is a good idea. Often narrowing down the problem to a small example clarifies in the poster's mind what the issue is, and isn't.</p>
