Dana's screened a lot of photos - he knows of which he speaks.
The two HQ
system does assist in the "look to accept" policy. HQ
'ing an image for which there is some subjective doubt (i.e. soft, level, dark, etc) lets the next screener know that (1) The first screener thought the image was fit for the database (2) there was some aspect of the photo that the first screener thought was marginal. Otherwise, we could just reject outright for what could be subjectively minor flaws. (I'm sure you don't want us to do that for your images...) I can tell you I have seen many HQ
images that have comments about some minor flaw, but I end up agreeing with the first screener that the flaw is minor enough for the image to be considered "High Quality".
In the end each screener screens the image completely as if it was the first time it was looked at. Comments on the HQ
give the second screener an idea of what the other guy was thinking.
It's not unclear to me unless I wish to be a master of pedantics. If an image is clearly without flaws, we use the "Instant Add" button. It says right in the quote you have selected "if it passes the second one as well, it will be added...". Pretty clear that it needs to pass two screenings, and that passing the first one isn't admission to the database.
Improvise, adapt, overcome.