haha!
I'm not opposed to Quality Content, I guess, I dislike people using the term to intimidate new users and make it hard for people to feel like their post is "good enough".
In truth, I've never heard of a website that wanted to stifle use, instead of encouraging
it.
:) Per usual, I love your art.
I can't imagine anyone being opposed to Quality Content (it being subjective). I see what you're saying about the term being used to bash new users over the head with [:)] resulting in their losing confidence and feeling inferior. I would be quite happy to let go of the word itself. Quality Content will remain, regardless of the subjective perceptions of others as to its 'Quality' and regardless of whether it adheres to any external definition of 'Quality'.
Perhaps it would be healthier to focus on authentic self-expression ie finding one's own voice, rather than looking for ever more sophisticated ways in which to mimic or copy the voices of others through regulation (insisting that 'Quality' is this or that). I would love to see this kind of self-expression encouraged and in many ways, the decentralised self-responsible (own banker, no password reminder, cut-out-middleman) paradigm of the blockchain supports this at some basic level.
Thanks for encouraging the fun @whatsup 🔆
Yep, it is all about the word and the impact it has on stifling users.
Instead we should tell people engage, engage, engage.