Yes, I agree with your assessment. I mentioned in the other thread that I was preparing against 2. Qd3 for a recent OTB game. What actually happened was: 1. d4 f5 2. Qd3 d6 3. Nc3 and after thinking for a few minutes, I decided to go for 3. ... d5(?!). I had virtually no experience with the Stonewall and ended up in a difficult position. My opponent didn't even go for e4.

What can I say.. it's an interesting line, but I'll try to thoroughly analyse this game before deciding on my 2nd and my 3rd move, but I sense I'll stick with 2. ... d6.  

P.S.: Such a pity I hadn't see this thread back then, as I would have been better prepared!..

I recently prepared for an opponent who sometimes plays 1.d4 f5 2.Qd3!?
Kindermann gives both 2. ... d5 and 2. ... d6 as playable, as a Leningrad player I like 2. ... d6 more.
Then he gives 3.g4 and 3.e4 fe4: 4.Qe4: Nf6 5.Qh4 Bf5! winning more time by the attack on c2 and black is slightly better.
However I nowhere found anything about 3.Nc3, which seems very plausible to me. White perpares to play e4 and take with the knight.
In the database there were 3 games, white made 2,5/3.
I don't like black's position after 3. ... Nf6 4.e4 (4.Bg5!?) Nc6 5.Nf3 when it is not so obvious how black should continue his development.
E.g. 5. ... g6 6.d5 Ne5 7.Ne5: de5: 8.Be2 +=