[TillE]

Forums with good moderation solve those problems. A nice example is rpg.net.

Traditional linear forums are still the best format for in-depth discussion, IMO. Threads actually stick around for more than a day or two. Just compare gamedev.net to /r/gamedev.

[mwfunk]

It felt like there was an inflection point around '96 or '97 when Usenet really dried up and web-based forums became the most common way to discuss things on the Internet. I blamed it on Slashdot at the time but I think it was inevitable as more and more people got on the Internet.

I really feel like we lost something though. Newsreaders provided a much better way to engage in the kinds of conversations that people have on place like HN or even Reddit. To this day I don't know of any web forums that offer the conveniences of newsreaders like tin or slrn. I miss killfiles (and plonking!) and really, really, really well-maintained FAQs on just about anything.

I'm not sure how much of my Usenet nostalgia is just remembering the good stuff. It may not have been as great as I remember, but it sure seemed like it at the time. I learned so much from it, from so many people in so many different newsgroups. Maybe that's what places like HN are to larval hackers today.

[stormbrew]

Well, discussion forums incite somewhat different types of posts than news sites (which are the primary case for peer-vote moderation for whatever reason). And top-down moderation is also quite different. So yeah, I agree those don't have that specific problem.