⋆｡ﾟ☁︎｡⋆｡ ﾟ☾ ﾟ｡⋆
[Parts of this are copied over from a forum post I made ;)]
My forum history began when I was about 10 years old. I used to subscribe to a monthly horse themed surprise box and it came with a forum that could only be accessed through the subscriber credentials. It shut down some years later, but it taught me a lot and was a really important space for my early internet days. The space was moderated by the company, not viewable without logging in, and intended for children and teens. I am grateful that we were able to have fun and be our cringey child selves without this being public or still available, or sold to anyone. I am also thankful for the "elders" in that community who explored difficult topics in a child-friendly way. We were able to have talks about death, domestic violence, mental health, sexual assault or the ethics of eating animals without everything imploding, being inappropriate, or taking up much of the space.
In other forums, the stints were more short term or just lurking without an account, so I don't really include them when counting stuff up. I am more active now on a forum again, and I noticed a shift in behaviors from what I was used to growing up as a child and in my teens, when social media either didn't exist or was still rather unpopular or more inaccessible and forums were still somewhat the standard. I'm wondering if I am biased by the forums I frequented and just had a lucky selection of them that behaved in the ways I will detail, or if there really is a shift.
My experience is that, back then, we were really aware that forum posts have the potential to stay up for years (or possibly decades) and will be read over and over again, be found by others who revisit or sign up a long time after you made a thread, and will be continued over months and years, and possibly "necroed" over and over. It won't really disappear, aside from being a few pages back, and it will show up on forum search still and be open to be commented on. Many forums had the rule to utilize the forum search first before making a new thread, to save on clutter and keep relevant info contained in one thread. Opening a thread is more like opening a public space for discussion that is then mostly out of our hands, or to be enjoyed over different forum generations and times, and is not really about us as original posters (unless it is specifically about us, like "Ava's Weekly Music Recommendation" or something) or to respond to them as a person. The focus is the topic and sharing information. There is this idea that this will be useful to a variety of people even after you as the original poster stop getting any use out of it. Maybe stopped having the problem, stopped using the forum, or grew out of it. But still, people find help and a space to discuss it in the thread you have opened. Like a little information hub to talk and share and gather sentiments and resources.
But I also feel like there is now a group who is very used to everything happening on their own profiles and the disappearance of content. Other social media, of the social media giants like FB, Twitter, Instagram etc. all have you publish on your own profile, so you really have this intentional design to have close ownership over a post or thread; it is directly attached to you and how you present yourself, like a T-Shirt you're wearing. What you choose to publish is very prominently displayed, more so than the actual info about you as a person. The posts are usually only for you, about you, or for closest friends. Then after a few hours or a day, it vanishes from everyone's feeds and the older a post is, the less it will be found and viewed and there is barely any value to comment on it now. Even on Reddit, which is more forum-esque than FB or Instagram, the threads disappear quickly within a day and are archived (no commenting possible) after 6 months. The reason you make the thread is mostly because *you* have an issue, *you* have to vent, *you* want something answered etc. and it solely pertains to you, and you are expected to respond specifically. Since there is no linear thread, but a lot of comments with their own subthreads, continued discussion over weeks or months is discouraged by design since it all tapers off into its smaller branches. Because of visibility and archiving, you are expected to make your own thread always instead of searching and reviving a fitting one. No one would read you posting in an old thread because it will not get bumped up for visibility, it will instead stay hidden. This adds to the feeling that threads are only about/for the original poster and their temporary question or problem.
And I think if you're very used to the latter and apply these principles to forums you frequent, those have the potential to change in tone and culture. I've observed that some people feel very protective over their threads, feeling very responsible and attached, like the responses are a reflection of themselves; they may be afraid of it "flopping" or being attacked by a large group like on other platforms. This seems to be like behaviors that fit in with how you learn to behave on the big social media sites.
They might even feel offended when "too many" people comment, or people comment after a few months when this topic was already over for them in their mind - this isn't usually something you have to deal with on other platforms. Lots of people engaging with your thread might not feel like a cool discussion and collaborative effort like it's meant to, but instead a pile-on. Or maybe, the discussion doesn't go as they wanted (but was still on topic and suitable) and they just lock it, taking that away for the members and future of the forum (unless it is unlocked again). Forum topics are never really... over over, I guess, with some small exceptions, and there is much less ownership over the thread and focus on you as the OP as you might think if you are used to Reddit and others.
I've also seen a change in response behavior. The forums I was active in or lurked in felt way more collaborative; there were big discussions in the threads, with lengthy posts and arguments that were really interesting, with people quoting each other, splitting the quote up in sections to respond to parts specifically and so on. People focused on new things to add to the discussion as to not duplicate arguments and also not simply post "I agree". You could be sure that they read the entire thread before making their own post. Sometimes, two people would just converse with eachother about it in there for days.
But nowadays I get the feeling we've all become a little lazy, and influenced by the social media culture that prioritizes responding over reading, and makes responding to people a stressful thing.
People tend to dislike long form posts and skip ahead. Some are less interested in other people's responses and often first paste their own comment before checking out the others. That's why you see so many comment sections on YouTube, Twitter etc. of many people saying the exact same thing. These threads or sections aren't about elaborating on a topic together or talking to each other, they are seemingly a space for you to respond to so you have something on your profile, or your followers can see, what your take is - no matter if it has been said there before. Maybe it is just there for people to see you two agree and follow you.
In the end, it matters more that you shared your position than adding something new. Generally, social media can produce a need to have to have an opinion about everything and voice it, "use your platform" "stand in solidarity", "make a point", "be visible" and so on; the pressure to perform in front of your followers and proving you are on the same side. It makes sense to me that this would spill over to forums.
I think I am guilty of some of this too, to a small degree, and try to be mindful of it. I see this spilling over when you can tell that people only read the thread title and immediately jumped to responding, or only read the original post. It can feel as if everyone is just putting in their own two cents without reading each others responses, resulting in a lot of the posts saying the same thing, and not adding on to what others have said. There might not be this internal check of "Oh, this has already been said. Then I don't need to post that again" because we are used to, and want to, make ourselves heard for personal reasons and to have a track record on this. We are used to the idea of people checking out our social media profiles and then discovering our posts and replies, and those being more informative than what the sites offer as a bio. The posts seem to stand in for a bigger actual profile information area like you've seen on Myspace, Facebook or SpaceHey. It's easily forgotten that forums are posts first, profiles second; many don't even look at the profiles or link them anywhere.
The posts often have no quotes, or not a reference to someone else's argument that was made, not mentioning any names. To be clear, you don't have to do that all the time, but to me it becomes noticeable when an entire thread is like this, or is seemingly the standard behavior of threads on a forum.
This behavior reminds me of social media games that feel like an interview or invite you to simply reply with your answers or results. Games like "Type with your nose";, "I took this quiz, what is your result"; "Fill out this survey/list of questions about yourself and tag 5 people"; "The first letter of your last name and your birth month makes your dinosaur name, what are you called? (with a number and letter list of name parts)". It doesn't surprise me that we sometimes see forum threads in a similar way now. The disadvantage that I see is that people rarely ever come back to a thread. They may not have read (all) replies anyway, and they have said their opinion regardless of how often the same sentiment was said, and then that's done, and there is no reason to return. Might as well put a little checkmark on that thread: Done! Answered!
It's a little disappointing because that also lends itself to another issue that social media has amplified: Only outrage, fights, or controversial things produce engagement. So it seems that there might only be discussions, quotes or reactions to someones thread reply when there could be a heated discussion or there's something rude or controversial about it. This brings the forum climate down and after enough time, people might feel similarly to social media in the sense that seeing you have a reply makes you nervous, hoping it isn't someone engaging in bad faith. It also sucks when you are another forum user and your informative effort posts don't go anywhere, while people rather pour in their whole energy to argue why someone is wrong or why a certain thing is bad.
I have no idea if this is a general thing or just my perception. I also have no idea how to make up for this phenomenon.
𓇽 ° . ༻ 𓈒 ꒪ ๋ ° .𓏲⠀ ๋࣭ ♡ ͘ ࣭⠀⸰ ⋆ ֗ ִ ᨒ .⋆ﾟ. ͘ ࣭⠀⸰ ♡ 𓂂 ◌ 𓇽 ° . ๋ 𓂂 ⠀✼ 𓇽