Unless you can give us solid examples of what you consider "high quality content", and compare that to what you consider "low quality content", please stop telling us to focus on "high quality content" and remove "low quality content"! There are certainly pages on my site that I would consider better than other pages, but without examples, I have no idea whether Google's algorithm feels the same way. And I honestly don't think that any of them fall fully into the "low quality" bin. Some may be shorter than others, but that's because there isn't that much to say about that particular topic; do I have to now pad out every post to meet your unwritten but implied requirements that they have to be long enough? On the flip side, I have long posts that I spent a lot of time on that deal with esoteric topics that not too many people might be interested in. I think they're high quality content, but should I pull them because not too many people are interested? Isn't this what the whole idea of "the long tail" is about, that individual content pages may not get a lot of traffic or interest, but in aggregate they add up to a significant proportion of my traffic? You've turned this into a guessing game, where the rules aren't posted, and can change at any time. Who would want to create content under those conditions? Especially when, as many of the commenters here state, scrapers wind up ranking higher than the original content page.