I never claimed it was solely what the admins think, but in the end it does usually come down to the practicality of the suggestion and the ability to implement or change. You, as a global, cannot say 'I like this suggestion and therefore I am going to implement it!' that is why you post suggestion; you have to defer to one of a higher rank, but you also have a lot more pull than normal member. The suggestion forum allows a fraction of community participation and gives the chance for you or I to propose ideas to the community at large. I could have a private discussion with an admin but it is much easier to post one here and to have it picked through concerning the good and bad elements.
Having the forum littered with 'I support' or other variants is not practical. By having posts limited to only those who have constructive opinions concerning the topic you don't have to wade through a lot of I support crap and you can get down to the brass tacks of the suggestion. It makes it a more efficient and much cleaner process and allows the poster to read through valid thoughts concerning the suggestion at hand, just as you and I are doing now. It would be like trying to have an intelligent discussion in the SF, because you know someone is going to pop in and say something like 'OP is fag' or some variation.
The test, in my opinion, for a post to not be counted as spam is: What does this post bring to further advance discussion? I support or I do not support does not add anything to the discussion, it doesn't advance it, make it better, or help with the decision making process. It would be an impediment to the flow of ideas in the simple fact that every thread is going to be laden with two or three word replies that simply would make it tedious to scroll until you found an intelligent opinion.
tl;dr
I do not support.
