There's probably certain expectations, subjective tastes, even objective measures that can decide what quality content. But what makes content quality? Is the name itself "content" reductive, resulting in a dumbing down effect? How about if we just 'make' things? Is quality something that is just, evident? There's a market even for bad content. So how do we define what makes a creation quality? Good, or bad?
I post this because of the recent Osaka video "The Truth about Denpachan" touches on this subject slightly.

a large part for me is the the intention behind it's creation if even the person behind it's creation only made it for the sake of getting "views" on the internet why is it worth the time of anyone else if it has no meaning behind it or no passion behind it then why should anyone else go out and find those things for it?

I’ve noticed there are threads with some good discussion which fizzle out into inane low quality posts made by 12 year old retard kids (see the NEETism and social class thread for what I’m talking about). In fact this is 90% of the site nowadays.

The issue with quality is that it can’t be entirely subjective. You have to have a shared yardstick, even if it’s somewhat hazy and not clearly defined, a social standard for what counts as good and bad quality that isn’t as narrow as the arbitrary standards of discord tyrants or so loose it’s akin to p3do heyuri.

>>2 agreed on intent. I can tell the difference between an honest take, and a video padded out to meet an ad quota. Talking in circles purposefully vs expressing some opinion with valid points and a human touch
>>3 i saw somewhere people mention the idea of boards that are designated for the purpose of exploring specific ideas, and having a space for the rants and low quality posts you mention. Im not sure how that works as im unfamiliar with the specifics of 4chan for example ( the site as a whole. I dont even know if thats the correct name ? )
Perhaps theres sense in that. I guess one could partition it off but i dont know the concequences of such, and how that would work

As a rounded off point to both the above, maybe theres some sense in having creators have their space, and a way to connect to those spaces. One blog run by one person is less prone to the low quality contributions of many. I guess also, topics of discussion that are more complex may attract low quality posts by just about anyone posting stuff to derail or change the subject. Reddit has the advantage of being able to hide responses behind a plus sign, so that the comment threads are more coherent, as much as reddit also has a problem with lowest common denominator effect such as "bro just google it" type rhetoric
Perhaps being so open to the young and inexperienced alongside more mature ages is what causes the lopsided contributions of either party
I dont think seperating by age is the way to go though. Theres a certain amount of freedom that can be both quality and low quality. So maybe solutions can be found by the spaces which the creators of denpa can expand their reach ( blog, video vlogs or essays, etc ) and following the quality that way. And this site can be the jumping off point to those spaces in a clearer way maybe. Like for example, i know one creator decided to have a secret channel, and a intetnet archive of it. The smaller spacethst creator has made, likely has common viewers of their creations so that the barrier to entry is less accessible. But more specific to their regular viewers. I dont know, maybe have a thread per creator ? Could be an option

The recently active threads page is the direct cause of many "low quality posts". I don't think it should be removed, because it serves a filtering function. The problem is that it's very difficult to have conversations which bypass that filter. I've mentioned it before, abstractly but i'll be much more clear this time. If you want higher quality engagement a substantial number of people need to start using Sage on all posts in certian threads to keep them from hitting recently active. Bookmark threads you want to follow. and live with the likely slow post frequency.

(i don't expect anyone to actually do any of this. but it is an actionable solution)

>>5 since you posted this ive made a few sage posts. I didnt know it was a thing until i saw this