~snip~
The quality of a post is often a subjective thing, because not all people have the same criteria, and I think that is completely normal.
I totally agree with this statement. I usually judge a post as quality based on the level of information/lesson or experience it conveys and how it is conveyed as well. I also like posts and replies that introduces another fresh angle/perspective to a discussion.
This is called a forum, and one of the main aims of any forum is a platform for the exchange of ideas, and perspectives. Any post that engages these aim of a forum is a quality post.
A question that I would like to ask is "Are all quality posts meritable?".
I agree as long as the long posts are read and the necessary information is taken within. However, short posts have more tendency to get read than a long post / long article besides they being more informative than the shorter ones.
Not all quality posts get merits. Does that mean that they are not read? All tend to read the last reply of a thread and move on? At times, you may feel a post as a quality one but you might have not had the opportunity to read that. But those who read, might have not seen it as a quality one. So here the quality post is missed by the right person and the post misses a merit?