Don't assume the OP is the only intended audience for any answer you write. These questions and answers are intended to be long-lived knowledge resources indexed by search engines. A good question page will be viewed by many thousands of visitors. Aim to be understood by this audience, and help them. Consider the OP's question a "case-in-point" opportunity to generalize and/or elaborate – though without writing a book and without straying too far. Links help, but don't liberally pepper an answer with links without somehow tying things together.
If an OP's question is potentially ambiguous with one narrow interpretation, but another more likely interpretation, perhaps arising from incorrect use of terminology or else a common misconception, please don't only address that narrow interpretation to the exclusion of the more common one.
If there's another possible interpretation, try to at least mention it in your answer, even if you aren't going to address that part. You can be terse, but don't obscure by omission. Refer back to point #1.
Be aware: in many cases, an OP never returns to clarify the original question. It's often up to the community to improve & clarify a question in order for it to be a lasting resource. As time passes, this concern becomes paramount! If the question simply cannot be improved to make it a useful question, it should be closed (and eventually deleted).
Don't fight the community on every question closure. Yes, sometimes an OP deserves a defense and a case might be made, a question perhaps modified to be on-topic once rationale is discovered, but many times a guideline has already been established. Not every guideline the community has already worked to establish should be revisited and questioned every time a new question arises that contravenes the guideline. Just because you may be knowledgeable, able, willing, and interested in answering a question doesn't make it on-topic here.
The world is bigger than the United States. I'm not sure where you're located, but from many of your answers you appear to have an affinity for quoting in great detail specific U.S. rules and regulations, perhaps because that is where you trade. While a very U.S-specific answer may not be technically incorrect when a question is in an ambiguous state, a later clarification about the OP's location may render your answer incorrect.
Where location may be a significant factor, encourage the OP to disclose the location, or look at their profile for the information (or other questions that provide the clue) and tag accordingly. Alternatively, if you prefer rep whoring with quick answers instead of first seeking clarification, then try to write your answer for the general case, e.g. as in what you understand major jurisdictions typically do, while, say, citing the U.S. as an example with the caveat that "it depends."
If you're suggesting an advanced and/or risky strategy, label it as such. Provide appropriate caveats. Even if the OP seems to know what they're talking about, remember the audience for this site: people who want to be financially literate. They aren't necessarily there yet.
Most users will be practicing personal finance using typical tools (consumer software, bank accounts, mutual fund accounts, discount brokerage accounts, etc.) and securities typically accessible to retail investors. Layering on information about tools, services, securities, or strategies likely only accessible to professional traders or accredited investors is seldom helpful unless the other bases have been covered as well.
There may be highly-educated investors, traders, software developers, physicists, and mathematicians frequenting this site and voting on answers, but please see point #1 again. Many of us voting here aren't looking to judge how smart you are, but how helpful your answers are. The core audience tends not to vote or comment. The typical reader of a question here is an anonymous visitor landing on a question page via search results. They have zero voting/commenting privileges. We fight for these users.
You've been here three months. Yet, the site and many of its frequently-posting, commenting, and voting experts have been around for one, two, three, four years. Respect and consider what other expert users are suggesting when they provide constructive criticism on an answer. You might win the same consideration for your comments when it's evident you're taking comments of the other experts seriously.
Try not to look at every critical comment as a challenge to be answered with a lengthy debate. We're not interested in a long string of "but ..., but ..., but..." and capitulating in exasperation. We'd rather you improve your answer. We try really hard to encourage you to improve your own answer. If we give up, we'll either improve it for you, or down-vote it to oblivion and delete it.
And most especially, ignore the troublemakers, the occasional sniper who might be out to get your goat. There are reformed assholes here, and I count myself among them from time to time. Some of these individuals relapse more than others. If I or anybody else should make a comment that's simply rude, insulting, or offensive, please flag it for a moderator's attention. Debates, where necessary, should remain debates, and not devolve into shit-slinging.