Not a silly question at all. This technique was introduced in Cubase SX. Prior to that the Effects handling was similar to the way one would expect from a real mixing console except for the fact that the effect outputs only went to the master out.
Many people questioned this over the years and I’ve always maintained that we should have effect “returns” like a traditional mixing desk. The main difference being that an effect would be hard-wired to the top of the return, not inserted into a buss. And, of course, an effects “rack” (which we had previously) where you could quickly go and make adjustments with intuitive ease.
My neurotic theory was that in Steinberg’s haste to provide a product that would function on the brand new unix based mac OSX and re-coded Windows XP they forgot to code in effects returns and just copied and pasted the code from the groups, re-colored and renamed it “effects track” 
Until then I had never heard the term “effects track” on a mixer. And at the time I think you had to first create an effects track and then go back and insert an effect yourself. It’s since been refined and I’ve long since submitted to the design.
So, no. It’s not a silly question. It shows that you’re capable of critical thought and not afraid to proclaim that the emperor is wearing no clothes. No Harm, no foul.
Here are a couple of very old threads on the topic that I participated in: