Quantity vs quality

[nkafkafi]

Isn't the worry about the volume of posts a bit misplaced? IMO the 
problem is not quantity but quality.

To illustrate, suppose we had 300 posts per day, and most of them 
were great. We would have felt sorry that we don't have time to read 
all of them, but would we think this situation is bad?

Or suppose that we had only 20 posts per day, but most of them would 
be of the "did anybody notice the gleam in DD's eyes" type. Is this a 
good situation?

Or, suppose that we had 300 posts per day, most of them garbage but 
about 10 of them are great, and you had a convenient and quick way to 
locate these 10. Wouldn't you consider this a good situation?

Also, I'm suspicious of any strong centralistic control measures. If 
there is a ban on one-liners or a limit on the number of posts per 
member per day, wouldn't such posters simply join several short posts 
in different subjects into a single post? The volume and quality will 
be the same, but trying to follow a thread would be more difficult.

My thought is that we need to target the main causes of low-quality 
posts, Preferably not by bans but by offering better alternatives. 
For example, if a newbie had a quick and convenient way to find past 
posts that discuss the gleam in DD's eyes, he would read them before 
posting, and then even if he does post, his post would be much more 
informed.

Neri