Short questions (and in some cases answers!) are perfectly acceptable. My latest Sloe / Foraging question was super short. However with some of the influx of new archery questions there's been a lot of short hand writing which from a new person to an activities point of view can be confusing and unclear.
In the same way that we always ask people to give full locations for United States trails as not everyone will know all the US short-hand state codes, like FL, CA etc. Those are always happily expanded. It's just some short hands are mis-leading to some/new people. This is similar to how confusing colloquialisms can be - like where I'm from a horses bit can have biscuits on. Doesn't make much sense if you're not experienced in that field.
I don't think the issue with those questions from OddDeer are length, I think just we tend to request some assumptions like that to be expanded for ease of reading. It's probably just coincidence that these are turning up on his shorter posts.
As a note I've also commented on one of his questions with the same shorthand as the
# in the UK is not commonly called the pound sign (he's using it to reference poundage) as we have
£ as a pound sign. In the UK the
# is actually called the number sign (or more recently a bloody hash tag) - so in cases like this being fuller is probably better.
(Also as Rory said it maybe the Community bot!)