Confusion:

At first, I drew a blank. I was not certain I could define a quality post. The quality of a post is subjective, but when you consider rewarding that post with some value, a definition became warranted. So, I find my reasoning to be similar to many others in this comment section.

Subjective Criteria:

There has to be some standardization across the board regarding a post's quality, or the rewards system doesn't make sense. A consequence of this would be a lack of engagement and value in the system.

1. Good grammar and writing structure
2. No plagiarism
3. Personalized content

Bases

Items #1 & 2 should be self-explanatory. No one likes it when an author copies/pastes someone else's work as their own. I think we can all agree on this point. Additionally, it serves as a good foundation for everything else that's judged. If the reader can understand a presented topic, they can ascribe some baseline value to the post.

Personalized content is what drives me to reward. Do you have a different take on a topic discussed frequently? Can you report on a topic and then deliver your message?