Except when it's too quiet and everyone stops posting.

I love this rule and I wanted to implement it on another fourms I was on... but it was voted against because they say that if you agree with a topic there is nothing more to say and so they will spam another 9 - 5 words to meet the 10 word requirement....

I'm totally for this rule, I love it.... but what I said above could prove a bit problematic...

There's tons of ways to add 5-9 more words without spamming though. I just did it. I could have said "That's not true" or something. There's always ways to legitimately lengthen a post.

Then I shalt count to three, no more, no less. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe (the poster of the question), who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.

Please give me a yes or no question that can not have elaboration added. If that's the case, then so be it and I will allow it.

Can 2 be divided by 1?

But in saying that, I believe that I just made your point.

Currently, I don't think that there is an issue with post quality at the minute. It seems that; at present, any topic can grow into a discussion and have a pretty good quality from top to bottom. Sure, you get the odd spam post, but they're dealt with speedily.

Yes, because one goes into two twice!

You kinda did prove it, but didn't. Either way, it's possible to add some elaboration. And if you look around, we're not overly strict on this. For example, intro threads... they're still fine to have something like "Welcome to the Studio!" as your entire post. And they also get a bit spammy. Recently Wrighty and I had a miniature spam war there, which should be proof enough it isn't too strictly enforced.