Because Google is an ALGORITHM. You can have a 400 word herpes article advising people to dip their genitals in baking soda and it may still be considered "quality" content by Google.
But what IS quality? What tickles the little penguin?
Is it 2 relevant pictures per 300 words?
Is it a combination of bullet-points and fancy formatting?
Correct grammar and sentence structure?
Is it a super low to non existent keyword density?
Is it some combination of these or other factors?
Or do you not know and just advise people to create it because it makes you look like you know what you're talking about without actually knowing what you're talking about? (ADMIT IT DAMMIT!)
I'm asking because that seems to be the golden answer for everything on this forum:
Newbie: "Dam my sites just got wiped out, help..."
Warrior1: "It's because you're focusing on ranking and not quality content"
Warrior2: "If only you guys would just listen to me, iv'e been telling everyone forever now to just create quality content."
Warrior 3,4,5: "What everyone else just said"
It would be interesting to see what METRICS you guys are using to judge "quality" content and if these have any correlation to the recent update. I mean lets face it, my version of quality and your quality are likely to be two totally different animals.
p.s. although mines tend to resemble more of a red headed step child