69 replies to this topic

[Adrian]

Forums used to be a bastion of online social communities. Not the first kind of community. You had newsgroups and others before Forums, in the form we see them now, became big. But for several years now, there have been lots of big forums, huge, diverse communites or people discussing various things in various manners. They've been one of the main forms of community on the web, especially since chat rooms began to decline in popularity.

Now that we have this new raft of social community, from the Diggs/Reddits/Teechmemes, to the Facebook/Myspaces/Bebos, are forums as we know them, under threat?

Kim's been mentioning it a bit recently, wondering how they fit into the new scheme of things, and I see Rand saying he's drifting more to blogs and social bookmarking sites from forums.

And actually, I can see what they mean. So many people now have blogs, especially within the broad web development community, that a lot of people write their musings there, or initiate discussions there. Lots of people are using the Digg/Reddit like sites for finding new links and discussing them, and I think more and more people are starting to use places like Facebook for relatively basic, easily setup communities.

With all this going on, what role does a forum, like this one for instance, have in the evolving social setup?
Do forums need to adapt to the new ways people are connecting and differentiate themselves? Do they needs to pick up on some of the things that other 'web 2.0' social sites are doing? In 3/4 years, are forums likely to have as big a following as they do now? Or will it just be the ones that keep up with the changing ideas of social media and the niche boutiques that keep, or expand, their following?

If you were setting up a new forum now, would the Diggs and Facebook of the world affect how you did it?

[Autocrat]

Different horses for different courses.

Bloggs often mean that only one person can set the topic... the blogg author, everyone else responds to the topic.
No different than Articles with comments on. Not exactly new either, jsut got a nice new name a while ago and caught the attention of those without the knowledge.

Facebook etc... again, a completely different kettle of fish - more for "interaction" and fun, socialising etc.


Forums are, at least originally, there for discussion, for bouncing around ideas (+keeping track of) thoughts/ideas/opinions... a forum


I don't think there is an issue with the different methods - it's the audiences that are the issues.
Social requires interaction... often fun/entertainment... the lighter side of things. Forums ares perceived as for more "Serious" things, or "Specific" things.... not general (as they require more structure/categorisation etc.


Give it time... something new will come out... people will get bored... forums qwill always be around (we just might have to changethe categorsation/association methods though).

[cre8pc]

I love it when my friends read my mind and ask all my questions for me!!

I definitely think the tide is going out on forums, unless they come up with something innovative. When I realized our threads were being Sphunn and commented on THERE, rather than here, that raised an eyebrow. We like the nod, of course, but it got me wondering.

Do people expect/want to vote and/or Digg/Sphinn/Fetch now?

SEOMoz jumped ahead by making their blog into a mini-forum with social aspects like voting. They developed a community via their blog, which is a high achievement and not common.

I like the ability to express emotions with emoticons, which blogs don't offer.

We're still the only forums, I believe, that took Danny Sullivan's lederhosen experience and turned it into an emoticon

[Autocrat]

Ugh!

Okay - this is a simple, flat thread forum, right - like ost of the others out there.
Most blogs are also flat - comments are in response to the blogg, not to other comments.

So what is the difference?
The presentation of the main item, and how the categorisation etc. appears.
With a little effort, I'm damn certain you can make this site look jsut like a blogg.
From there, it should also be easy enough to include some links for feeds and bookmarks etc attached to the main/topic start.

Does that make sense?
The data structure is almost identical!!!



The alternative, as I suggested else where, is to get a decent CMS and mod it a little - the better ones have everything you need afully integrated any way (Articles/Ratings/Comments/HitCount/Statistics/Membership+Anonymous/BBcode/WYSIWYG Editors etc.)
The realyl good ones will enable you to extend the performance ofthe existing thigs easily - there are at least 3 I know of with DynamicData or Extensions that let you add extra fields/data/functions within minutes.
Additionally, you can then apply multiple categorisation and taxonomy... so people can find things in all the relevant places rather than jsut one!

Though it wouldn't be fun - export the data from here shouldn't be difficult, as you would havethe relevant ID's for association, you can then import them and attach the additional values.

[Adrian]

The difference, Autocrat, I think isn't necessarily the technology, or how if functions, it's the way communities are acting.

Things can be a lot more distributed now.
In times gone by Forums could be relatively closed communities. They could be open to everyone to access and join, but generally the discussion stayed in the forum. That's not the case now, as Kim said, you can go to Sphinn now and see people carrying on a discussion there, that started here.
Barry's been doing the wonderful job at SE Roundtable, acting as an editorialised forum aggregator, and gets various comments there. Forums threads could pop up on Digg or Reddit, they could be carried into Twitter or Facebook.

One discussion on a forum could spawn a dozen offshoot discussions on other sites.

And that's the difference, things are happening elsewhere, not within the forum walls.

And does a forum not lose something if some of the knowledge and discussion is happening elsewhere?
We could be asking wonderful questions, having great discussions, yet other people could be coming up with wonderful answers and responses as well, that might never be known to people involved in the initial forum thread.

If you're running a forum and that happens, you might feel a bit hurt, it feels a bit like other people getting credit for your work. But to be honest, why shouldn't people discuss what they like, where they like?

I'm sure forums aren't about to suddenly die out. There's a lot of life left in them, and yes, the blog or social bookmarking style will appeal to some, while forums will appeal to others. But is the forum hayday coming to an end? or already over?
Have they peaked? Are they 'old media', or Web1.0 compared to the newer community sites?

There have been some trendsetters, Threadwatch was arguably ahead of the game in it's style, Nick always said it was neither specifically a blog or a forum, but it had lots of components of both. Barry's SERoundtable broke down a few barriers between various forums of our genre. Kim's mentioned SEOMoz, Sphinn has obviously eaten up a chunk of our particular topic's market since Danny got that going.

They have all (or had, in TW's case) attracted people who either have cut down on forum time, or stopped being forum regulars at all, as well as bringing in people who were never forum followers in the first place.

On the whole, a lot of lines are getting more blurred. I can stay here and talk to Cre8asite regulars, or I can go to Sphinn and talk to Sphinn regulars, who could be regulars of a variety of other forums themselves, possibly discussing Cre8asite threads....
Or I could go to my blog, and post about something that I read here, and if I had some readers, I could have a discussion there about it as well.

[Autocrat]

Erm.... I may have missed a serious point there... as to me, it's no different than any of us going and menttioning a thread/topic/idea on sites such as sitepoint/webdec/csscreator/daniweb etc.

If you look at any of those, a fair few belong to multiples (I know I do, I saw respree the other day too ).
It's basicalyl how most folk are on the net in general now - it is not a "single site" kind of place nor crowd.


Blogs are simply article systems.
Some have simple comments on - in which case they follow the same structure as many simple forums.
Others have threaded responses, and follw the same tech as threaded forums/newsgroups etc.


The technology isn't really any different - it is the way they are presented and how people perceive them.
If you want your forum community to be more "up", then you alter how it looks and acts.
People respond to lables - they expect a blogto be more open/personal/one2one - forums are are more communial - articles are informative etc. etc. etc.

Trust me, change the layout of this very site, call it a blog, and new people will come here and treat it exactly like a blog - though it's still our dear little forum!

[Ruud]

With all this going on, what role does a forum, like this one for instance, have in the evolving social setup?

By nature, I believe, all social media, including forums, are complementary.

There are no either/or choices between; face-to-face talk, telephone call, email, instant message.

The nature of the message, the availability of others, and the hope, expectation or need that the message results in a conversation, will determine which medium to use when.

Taking a step outside the link-happy moments ("oh look! a rainbow!"), a forum by its very nature has a huge thing going for it: it is meant as a place to talk, discuss, converse.

I could start a conversation on any subject right now. I can't do so on Digg, Reddit or Sphinn. These require me to have something to point to (the URL) to talk about.

Only at a forum can you be the thread starter...

In times gone by Forums could be relatively closed communities. They could be open to everyone to access and join, but generally the discussion stayed in the forum. That's not the case now, as Kim said, you can go to Sphinn now and see people carrying on a discussion there, that started here.

1) The discussions might have stayed in the forum but the resulting knowledge and ideas didn't: knowledge is viral.

2) Basically a pot & kettle situation. Forum discussions touch "outside" ideas and knowledge. Link to out of forum resources. The latest linkbait post from someone is discussed.

Have they peaked? Are they 'old media', or Web1.0 compared to the newer community sites?

My wife is into digital scrapbooking. That whole community is very web-aware. Some use sharing programs, many have blogs. It is in such a knowledge and idea sharing community that you well see the vibrancy of the forum concept, whether online or offline.

A social bookmarking site built on Pligg or so would not help them have their conversation, share their creations, share their knowledge, ask their questions. A forum does.

[swainzy]

And that's the difference, things are happening elsewhere, not within the forum walls.

And does a forum not lose something if some of the knowledge and discussion is happening elsewhere?
We could be asking wonderful questions, having great discussions, yet other people could be coming up with wonderful answers and responses as well, that might never be known to people involved in the initial forum thread.
On the whole, a lot of lines are getting more blurred. I can stay here and talk to Cre8asite regulars, or I can go to Sphinn and talk to Sphinn regulars, who could be regulars of a variety of other forums themselves, possibly discussing Cre8asite threads....

Adrian, I am glad you brought this up. I am not out there at other forums or social sites. I visit a few people's blogs from Cre8 but that's it for me and I can sense a change in our forums. That's is why I have asked "Where is Everybody". I have not joined Facebook but have asked a fellow mod how many of us are over there. I am hoping that this has not/will not take away the energy and commitment we have for Cre8.

With so many places now set up to meet on the web, it seems more convenient to do it more or less in one place like a forum. Social sites seem to be diluting the forum format. I mean a blog is a person's point of view/platform but a forum is a community of people who are committed to a theme and in our case, it's helping others. Not sure what the social sites serve. Someone can inform me on that.

[projectphp]

Forums serve people who want to interact with others on everyone's terms. Blogs are about interacting with others on your own terms. Social media is about finding stuff to avoid work

Blogs serve those who are motivated, forums those who like to be involved infrequently. A blog needs a "satrr", who regularly writes. Forums stay alive by weight of numbers. and no one is required to "carry" it.

Which is better, worse orr otherwise is pure perspective. Rand likely gets more out being a blogger than forum member. Whereas someone like me, for whom the word "sporadic" was invented, benefits more from a forum.

Others, with an eye for talent but perhaps either a lack of self confidence or simply no interest in creating, are better suited to social media, where they can point out cool stuff, and develop a reputation based upon a critical eye.

All will survive, but forums are likely to be,m unfortunately, the least profitable in purely monetary terms.

[Adrian]

I tend to agree that the different forms I've been talking about can generally co-exist on the web. It's just that in the past, there wasn't much for forums to compete with in the way of communities. In the last couple of years that's changed, some people who would've been forum goers, maybe aren't now, or aren't as much.

By evolving a bit, can forums keep hold of some people who like what they see in other types of online community?

Ignore these forums specifically, or the fact I'm an admin here, I'm looking at it generally from the point of view of a forum owner who's been managing to run some popular forums. But maybe recently, the pull of other, non-forum, communities are acting as competition to the ongoing popularity of the forum.

[A.N.Onym]

I think it depends on the people, mostly. I'd say this is the only reason people stay on forums, blogs or elsewhere.

To get members to a forum, you need to put extremely valuable people here and make it clear that any member can get their response.

You said you aren't posting as a Cre8 Admin, but let me still give a Cre8 example.

If you brought Ammon here, so he would be replying to every post, requiring a thoughtful response, and make this known, I am sure this forum would be more readily acquiring members and visitors (that's one of the reasons this forum got its members, so polite, thoughtful and otherwise different from DP). Add a couple of more full time people, so they would discuss the everyday issues in the threads, even among themselves, and we got another reason to stop by.


If we take SEOmoz, as an example, it gets plenty of comments and grows, because it was the intent to build a community and the crew worked on it, hard. They responded to questions, interacted with the community and such. Naturally, a community was built around a very responsive and sometimes entertaining core of the people.


On social sites, people get to randomly interact with other people, see their emotions, interests and share things that interest them. If we make it easy for forum members to share things they like, it'll be a social site, too, regardless of how it's called.

Edited by A.N.Onym, 13 November 2007 - 07:48 AM.

[cre8pc]

If you brought Ammon here, so he would be replying to every post, requiring a thoughtful response, and make this known, I am sure this forum would be more readily acquiring members and visitors (that's one of the reasons this forum got its members, so polite, thoughtful and otherwise different from DP). Add a couple of more full time people, so they would discuss the everyday issues in the threads, even among themselves, and we got another reason to stop by.

If I may step in here...

Ammon helped launched these forums over 5 years ago, and left not long ago after nearly 10,000 posts. I think it's a mistake to hero-worship anyone at a forums or participate in one because of the perceived power of one individual. He still comes by whenever he can and contributes with the same care and devotion he always did...but he has a right to do more with his life and I'm thrilled he had to courage to follow his heart.

I also realize that many people forget that many forums are staffed by volunteers, with families and jobs. Not sure what you mean by "full time people". I don't demand "full time" volunteer "work" here, so it's not going to come unless someone has nothing else to do...highly unlikely. These forums are not my priority either. If I was earning a living from them, sure. That's not how they're set up.

After 5 years of managing discussions and spam the likes of which most the Community has never seen, moderators and admins get burned out. This is one of the reasons why we encourage the Community to start discussions, help people and welcome new members, as well as many regulars flag spam and alert us of things they dislike in their Community.

This is the part about forums that blogs don't tap into. The responsibility for the success of a forums lies with the Community. Blogs are typically the responsibility of their owner and many have contributors who are paid in some way (company employees, revenue share).

One of the problems we do have here is that our moderators are in top-level positions in their companies or actual owners. They may not have started out that way when they first signed on to be moderators but their exposure here helped their careers. As they have more work demands, we see less of them here. It's a definite issue, but opens the door to the Community to show their stuff.

We pluck talent from the Community because a forums provides a way to get to know people, personalities, skills, and their ability (or not) to communicate well.

[A.N.Onym]

I am not saying that one will join the forum just to read one man's thoughts. A promise to get a good response from one or few people is what can keep people coming back. Obviously, the forum is comprised of a contribution of all forum members, even those that make one post and leave/stay/lurk.

Likewise, full time may sound too corporate. With more free time, maybe?

At any rate, I wasn't suggesting something to the forums, I was giving an example how a forum can easily acquire value.


As for responsibility, while no one realizes it, everyone is responsible for the site they write for. Forum posters, blog commenters and social site members all help shape the sites they they frequent. In a way, top members may realize the responsibility, because they are contributing the most visible and looked after content, but other than that, people just live and have fun.

[bragadocchio]

Now that we have this new raft of social community, from the Diggs/Reddits/Teechmemes, to the Facebook/Myspaces/Bebos, are forums as we know them, under threat?

In many ways, most of these sites aren't about community, or discussion.

Take for instance Digg, which isn't about asking for or sharing ideas or suggestions, requesting constructive criticism, discussing a process or practice, or soliciting alternative viewpoints or perspectives. It's all about being the first to post a link to a web page.

Techmeme isn't a community at all, but rather a collection of links clustering around a topic, which sometimes fails miserably in identifying the post where that topic originates in favor of a more popular source. There's no community involvement at all there.

Facebook started as an online version of a "facebook" which allows people to put names to faces on a campus setting. While it can be very effective as a contact/address application, and provides a lot of ways for people to communicate, it doesn't focus upon discussion the way that a forum can and does.

So many people now have blogs, especially within the broad web development community, that a lot of people write their musings there, or initiate discussions there.

True, but those are often guided by one voice and don't provide the chance for anyone who is a member to initiate a post, or ask questions, or submit a web site for review. The focus isn't community. There's rarely the same chance for an exchange of ideas, or collaborative learning that you find at forums.

If you were setting up a new forum now, would the Diggs and Facebook of the world affect how you did it?

Possibly. I would think that I would want to give people more ability to use and personalize a profile page, but not too much. I would still want the focus to be upon the exchange of ideas within the forum itself.

Social requires interaction... often fun/entertainment... the lighter side of things. Forums ares perceived as for more "Serious" things, or "Specific" things.... not general (as they require more structure/categorisation etc.

I think that's true, but we have some parts of the forum that are aimed at less serious things, like the afterhours forum.

Do people expect/want to vote and/or Digg/Sphinn/Fetch now?

I've seen a few forums add buttons for different social networks, which had me wondering if it is something that we should do. I don't know that we should, but I look at mentions on places like Sphinn or Fetch or Digg a chance for people to come here, and hold more in depth conversations at this place.

[bragadocchio]

Okay - this is a simple, flat thread forum, right - like ost of the others out there.
Most blogs are also flat - comments are in response to the blogg, not to other comments.

Right, but it's not too hard to quote a previous post and respond to it like I'm doing now. I don't know that we need indentation, and threadiing to communicate with each other. I'm also not convinced that we need to repurpose the structure of the site to make it more "blog like."

On the whole, a lot of lines are getting more blurred. I can stay here and talk to Cre8asite regulars, or I can go to Sphinn and talk to Sphinn regulars, who could be regulars of a variety of other forums themselves, possibly discussing Cre8asite threads....

There are some differences. For example, how likely is it that someone on Sphinn or Digg or Fetch will find an older topic that is interesting to them, and post some comment or question? If they do, there's little chance that someone will respond, and will reinvigorate that thread. Yet, it's quite possible here.

Many social sites are only about today, and today's news. They aren't meant for serious discussion, or personal conversation, and most of them focus upon stuff found and written about offsite.

Erm.... I may have missed a serious point there... as to me, it's no different than any of us going and menttioning a thread/topic/idea on sites such as sitepoint/webdec/csscreator/daniweb etc

True, but it's not uncommon for someone to come along in a forum thread and discuss topics raised in one of those articles, and provide some others that show different points or perspectives. In a place like Digg, that might be frowned upon because it expands the topic outside of the range of the original post. In a forum, the exploration of ideas is more important.

Taking a step outside the link-happy moments ("oh look! a rainbow!"), a forum by its very nature has a huge thing going for it: it is meant as a place to talk, discuss, converse.

I could start a conversation on any subject right now. I can't do so on Digg, Reddit or Sphinn. These require me to have something to point to (the URL) to talk about.

Agreed completely. We have different forums here, with different focuses, but we aren't bound so tightly to something else found somewhere else. If we wander a little off topic, there's no harm. If we wander a lot off topic, it's the chance to split a post off, and start a new thread and a new discussion.

Not sure what the social sites serve. Someone can inform me on that.

There are a lot of different social sites with different purposes. Some of them are ways to meet new people whom you otherwise wouldn't have met before. Some of them are really bookmarking services that enable you to share sites you find interesting with others, and may help you find people who share some common interests with you.

The responsibility for the success of a forums lies with the Community. Blogs are typically the responsibility of their owner and many have contributors who are paid in some way (company employees, revenue share).

One of the things that I really like about being involved in the forums here is seeing people getting involved and growing.

It's really great to see people join who confess that they don't know much about the Web or design or SEO, and get involved in discussions and learn and grow along with every one else, and become a leader. It's one of the things I enjoy most about being a part of the forums.

I know that I've learned a lot from participating with other people here with different skills and knowledge and experiences.

As for responsibility, while no one realizes it, everyone is responsible for the site they write for. Forum posters, blog commenters and social site members all help shape the sites they they frequent. In a way, top members may realize the responsibility, because they are contributing the most visible and looked after content, but other than that, people just live and have fun.

Participating in a forum should be fun, and it should be a chance to be exposed to ideas that you may not have come across before, or make friends, or share some of your own experiences and ideas. In many ways, the software that we use should both help us do those things, and keep out of the way when we try to have conversations.

[bwelford]

I think that's a valuable point you have brought out, Bill. These social communities are basically very different animals. Early in the life of Sphinn, Danny Sullivan was suggesting that it was a Web 2.0 type of forum. In the very early days it had a little of the characteristics of forum. By now my perception is that it is much more like Digg. Most people go to to get visibility. Items that get any serious connected discussion are very much in the minority.

I think a successful forum is one where you can get multiperson connected discussions. That suggests to me that there are two parameters you could measure which will tell you whether a given community is really a forum.

The first measure would be the proportion of items created in the community that have at least one response. The second measure would be the average length (number of responses) of the conversation for typical items.

I believe both of these would be much higher for a community like the Cre8Asite Forums than for a community like Digg or StumbleUpon. I believe that Sphinn would be closer to the Digg end of this dimension.

Each community attracts members who wish to partake in in the activity of that community. If you want to get visibility, then Digg is for you. If you want to get involved in discussions, then the Cre8Asite Forums are for you.

[cre8pc]

I know that I've learned a lot from participating with other people here with different skills and knowledge and experiences.

Exactly.

It can be difficult to ask questions because of the fear of looking dumb, but if we all take this approach, and only let the experts speak or answer questions, then we have no way of knowing what the Community wants or needs because many of them may be to intimidated to let us know.

I deplore "Personalities" in both the SEO and Usability industries who can't be bothered with their peers unless those peers are as "hot" as they are. There's been occasions when I don't approach people because I figure I'm a nobody (I did this to Danny Sullivan, in fact, and he wasn't happy to hear I was too intimidated to approach him. Last time I saw him, I went to shake his hand and he would have none of that...and went for a hug. Made my day!)

I've learned that someone as famous as Jakob Nielson is approachable and happy to answer questions. We find these people because of their presence online and use their blogs or forums or social sites to help us gauge things like trust, skill level, approachability...countless things.

Forums, for me, because of the longer discussions, really help in this way. Blogs that encourage comments do too, but it's not the same. My blog has regulars and we have fun, but real discussions on any topic usually take place here, which is why I link to them so often

[bragadocchio]

Early in the life of Sphinn, Danny Sullivan was suggesting that it was a Web 2.0 type of forum. In the very early days it had a little of the characteristics of forum. By now my perception is that it is much more like Digg. Most people go to to get visibility. Items that get any serious connected discussion are very much in the minority.

I think you might be right about the evolution of Sphinn.

There are two kinds of posts that you can make at Sphinn - one that links to a site, and another that is a discussion on a topic - yet the interface keeps them together. I wonder what it would be like if the discussion type posts lived outside of the news type posts, so that you had a sphinn news separate from a sphinn talk. Would there be more discussions, and less pointing to sites to give them visibility?

Forums, for me, because of the longer discussions, really help in this way. Blogs that encourage comments do too, but it's not the same.

I really like that anyone can post, and start discussions, and add their own unique perspectives within a forum setting. You don't need to be an expert to have an opinion or a great idea or a fresh perspective or a question or a different point of view.

I really like when people post comments and questions at my blog, but I'd definitely say that the forums provides a much great chance and opportunity for a conversation on a topic, and upon a multitude of topics.

[Adrian]

OK, there have been a few comments about the format of a blog, and how it's about one person talking to their readers, rather than one person asking a question, or starting a discussion inside a community.

Well, yes, an individual blog is written by one person, or one team. You could look at some places like SE Roundtable where it's even a little broader than that.
But, take a group of blogs as a whole, and any of them can start a discussion, or comment on another one. Often you'll see a storm brew in the blogosphere because one blogger has said something controversial, and dozens of other people respond to it from their own blog.

They aren't threaded in the same way, and aren't as closely tied together, you may well not see all the comments on a particular discussion, you may not want to see them all! But there are various groups of people who use their blog as a soap box to comment on discussions started elsewhere. Or to start their own discussions and see who might pick up on it and read it.
For some people, this might be more suitable. If you have your own blog, it's pretty much upto you what you put on there. If you want to post on a forum, you're having to stick to the house rules, or risk having your post edited/deleted and possibly end up getting yourself banned.
You may not have said anything that you feel is really out of line, but you're at the mercy of the forum mods.

It's also down to 'ownership'. If you post on your blog, you 'own' the post, any traffic it generates goes to your web site, maybe helps with your advertising. If you post on a forum, there isn't that same level of ownership.
Some people are happy with that, and really don't mind. As has been pointed out, a lot of people on forums are likely there precisely because of the way things are fairly linear and grouped together, and all their favourite people are right there and reading anyway.
I wonder quite how big that group is though. Does it constitute 95% of the members of forum communities, and therefore other types of online community are unlikely to take up their time to a point where forums aren't high on their priorty list.
Or is it maybe more like 60-70%, and actually, a decent number of people are more likely to spend their time in other types of online community, however loose that community may be, than the forums they may have frequented previously.

These social communities are basically very different animals.

That's one of my points. However similar the tech may essentially be, the communities function in quite different ways.

I think a successful forum is one where you can get multiperson connected discussions. That suggests to me that there are two parameters you could measure which will tell you whether a given community is really a forum.

The first measure would be the proportion of items created in the community that have at least one response. The second measure would be the average length (number of responses) of the conversation for typical items.

I believe both of these would be much higher for a community like the Cre8Asite Forums than for a community like Digg or StumbleUpon. I believe that Sphinn would be closer to the Digg end of this dimension.

Sorry Barry, but by both those 2 measures, places like Digg and Reddit are going to be miles ahead of a forum like Cre8asite, and I'd reckon, most forums on the web.

There are shed laods of new items posted to those sites every day. I don't follow Digg these days, but I do have the Reddit Programming section popping up in Bloglines, and in just that section there are loads of new stories each day. Quite a number also get several responses. Maybe not on quite the level that somewhere like Digg, or Slashdot does, but there's still a LOT of commenting going on.
There may also be a fair number of Digg/Reddit submissions that don't get responses, but what about all the spam forums get?
If we made as much effort to filter spam as Digg do (i.e. less effort than we already make), we'd have even more spam, which would either be left to rot out front, or we'd delete.

There are some blogs that manage the same. Check out the average Techcrunch or Scoble post, and you'll likely see quite a few responses and trackbacks.

On the same token, there are also a decent number of fairly dead forums out there, with very little posting, and very little replying.

I should say that I don't know what I think of my own questions. My feeling is that things are, and have been, changing/evolving, and I'm thinking out loud about what effect that may, or may not, have on forums like this one.

Certainly joining an active forum gives you an instant audience for whatever you might have to say/ask, whereas setting up a blog doesn't offer you the same resource to tap straight into, and sites like Digg/Reddit are notoriously bad in terms of quality of comments, and you still have to rely on eyeballs seeing your submission before most people will see it.
On the other hand, not all forums are quite as good as say, this one and the quality of comments/discussion on them can be less than helpful.

[bwelford]

Adrian, you may be right in your perception of comments on Digg, although I saw it otherwise.

Perhaps you have to take into account the content of the comments as well. So perhaps it's the percentage of items which have greater than say 50 kB of discussion. Would that be a better discriminator between the good Forums and the Diggs of this world?