I think finding a solution to the problem of sustainability on small forums could start to be found by considering discussion as a low population or team requiring activity and then taking inspiration from the others. Examples being minigames in MMORPGs, dancing, sports, or clubs instead of just looking towards web social platform development. I think one of the problems shared is asynchrony. One of the ways they solve the asynchronous hurdle is by co-scheduling events with each other.

For example, it wouldn't be fulfilling to go a tennis court expecting a partner and them to only maybe to show up two weeks after you expected them to. By the time they show up you might no longer be in the mood, and so they themselves may expect this and not attempt to show up late even at all. Discussion is clearly more elastic in the required synchrony of the participants but I believe there is a limit – which small forums run into long term to the detriment of them.

Following off of the above, for a variety 'freeform' forum it could maybe be of beneficial effect to have organized spotlights weeks or by batching post releases. This would be used for slower topics, or the topics people think less of and feel more through in their experience of them.

You may not be unified around a single common interest but your trajectory and experience through topics could (partially) be.

Some predictability for when posts and returning discussion should arise on topics would probably be fulfilling to readers as well as posters looking for discussion. Beyond just making participation more satisfying it increases memorability of the forum by charting itself precisely into a person future as a time to check back. You could even seed a new spotlight session with popular posts from past sessions as a way of introducing new participants to old community hallmark posts as well as guaranteeing something to be there to see when you show up.

If you used spotlight weeks for certain topics, it also helps be a middle ground solution between having a broad topic board that has no direction and siloing a subtopic into its own isolated board before it has the ability to actually self sustain itself – which is another issue I think small forums run into long term.

FYI 1000 hours, is about 41 24-hour days. Assuming you play a game for only 4 hours per day, that's a little over 166 days. I think everyone one of us has played something longer than 166 days (especially if you were one of THOSE MMO players back in the day), so it doesn't hold water to me.

I have been a member of one small forum since 2011, it's largely been ticking along as some guys side project. It used to be a lot more popular in the past and more so before I joined with over 4,000 registered users but now its the same 100 or so people posting, about 10 of which do so regularly and they seem to all know each other offline or from other communities. I have gone months and years between visits, will sit with it open in a pinned tab for a few months and then forget about it again. I'm glad it's still alive.

Similarly I have been a member of the DOS Games forum since 2008 but I only rarely visit, usually when I have a question. When I do, I try to have a look around at the recent threads to see if there is anything I have something of value to add but normally I lurk and leave.

I think the biggest issue small forums like this one have is discoverability; I was very excited to discover this forum, but it was by accident that I did so (I think it was via the "the internet is (a little) boring" blog post.)

my hope is that this issue is solved with more content, and that only comes with time.

I use a rhythm gaming forum in a similar way. I think that ultimately, this is the root cause of a lot of small websites dying out. I don't know much about DOS Games, but for rhythm games, there just isn't enough news to talk about every day. (I don't think that's a bad thing either, games shouldn't consume every waking moment of your life). Because of that, there aren't many new threads, and so most people don't check very often, and so not many people respond when there is a new thread.

Under these conditions, it makes sense that people would invent social media. Take all of your "one new thread a month" sites, and combine them into one feed. That way you don't need to remember to check some obscure forum, you just see the news pop up in your feed. 20 years ago, I would have thought it was a genius idea.

I'm sure we've all gone on at length about how bad social media is, so there's no need to recap here. Ironically, the technology of the past (mailing lists and rss feeds) do a better job of simply unifying feeds. Even then though, I'm not sure it's what I want. I'm trying to be more intentional with my time instead of blindly consuming, but that's a bit off topic.

Ultimatly I think it's a case of different platforms for different speed of communication:

You want to post a question to a certain community and have it collect replies over a period of days, weeks, months or even years then a forum is perfect; doubly so because that thread can remain useful for future visitors so long as the forum remains online or has otherwise been archived.

At the other end of the spectrum you have instant messaging, IRC, Matrix, various platforms direct message solutions, etc. These are perfect for short, throw away conversations that are transient.

Inbetween these two lie social media; here you may have have permanence like a forum however the window in which these threads remain visible is shortened to at most a couple of days with an incredibly high noise to signal.

Forum threads have a longevity to them, forums in general are community focused and instant messaging can be community focused. Social media is largely audience focused, less about interacting with a community and more about broadcasting to them, the rise of the Feidverse has brought a welcome change to that, in that my experience of federated platforms being more akin to a community space than a stage to perform on.

I'm actually dissapointed that the yesterweb forums are being deleted after their shutdown, there are some good threads on there that would be useful to future netizen's and to my mind archiving the whole lot as a static served website hosted under the domain is the way to go but it is what it is.

Before social media, even a niche within a niche seemed to attract enough users to keep a dedicated forum lively and worth checking. In fact, I remember hanging out on subforums that had their own exclusive sets of dedicated users.

Of course busy hobby forums do still exist. Cluck.

https://www.backyardchickens.com/forums/

And here's a tangentially related discussion on Blue Dwarf:

https://bluedwarf.top/cackle/view-post.php?post_num=2423

I think this is the greatest part of forums that are not taken advantage of. Once a forum grows large enough there is a trend of repeating content, whether it's the same questions being repeated every few months, or the same – or just very similar – topic getting brought up, splitting conversations into several parts, making things harder to search, and just wasting space. There is no 'necro' on a forum that is well-organized.

I am curious though, were they still "fun" after so long? Maybe it was, I dunno. There are all kinds of people in the world. I've played a few games past the 1000 hour mark though, and I'm not sure if I would say I still had "fun" playing them. After so long, it's just mindlessly going through the motions, or worse, an obligation that feels like a chore I still do just because I've invested so much time in it already. At the very least it loses some of the magic it once had.

That's a good point, I hadn't thought of that. Maybe it's too early to focus on longevity. Maybe once you get enough quality discussion threads, new users keep joining and adding their thoughts indefinitely. Still though, I'm worried something is lost without a good enough notification system.

If a new user adds a new comment every other month for example, would you still keep checking your old thread for updates? I don't like the crazy rapid pace of social media, but I do think there's some value in back-and-forth communication, as opposed to periodic replies to the original post.

agora's is really good. I think sending notifications for threads you posted in is a good idea and eventually one i'd like to implement.

if this was a busier forum it'd get annoying but it really works for smaller forums

right now you kinda have to rely on people quoting you or checking your bookmarks page, which I think are solid options but notifications would definitely be best

I would support notifications for bookmarked threads as well, but only with some sort of option to turn off auto-bookmarking threads which you replied to as it may get out of hand quickly on the occasion of multiple threads beginning to pick up pace.

luckily that's already an option in your settings!

Whoops, I have completely missed that one. Thank you.

Adding my own two cents to the idea of the old web and how i see it:

I am a 99er kid, the old internet exists only in nostalgic childhood memories for me, and i miss the sense of exploration and the feeling of finding strange nieche things somewehre out there in the wild.

All these small very personal things really brought me a lot of joy and thats why i love these kinds of forums and all this decentralized internet with lots of small, independent but still connected spaces so much! I mean, it is just nice. I found this place trough a search site called marginalia, wich is good for finding such small little gems. Idk man, i am just happy that this kind of place still exists.

Marginalia's engine is great, I've found so many cool little blogs through that.

My biggest problem with small forums is that you can follow the same users all over the Internet, where they all use the same small web services and are part of the same small web communities. Of course you could always do that, but in the large web, you're just one face no one cares about in a sea of faces.

Back when forums were a mainstream way to interact with other Internet users, it was the same way. If one user was particularly weird or interesting, you could follow them around for lulz, but there were so many users that no one has time to fixate on anyone. Unless you were a particularly special case, you would be lost in the sea of users and forgotten quickly. That's how the current mainstream Internet is as well.

The small web is unintentional honey pot for a specific type of person who hasn't realized things have changed. They want to escape Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Tiktok by going back to sharing their lives like it's LiveJournal again in a place where no one is looking (except people are looking: specific types of people who are plugged into the lowest places on the alt internet) and you're escalating yourself into Internet Drama land the more you solidify an identity in these kinds of spaces.

You would be better off on the mainstream Internet, as much as it sucks.

People on the small web want to pretend that they can go back, but we can't. The oldweb is gone.

Welcome to basement community, homie. Pls, frame my response in the kindest possible way, as, despite as you'll read I don't agree with you, we clearly share a strong interest in this topic, and I really like that:

Yes! And on top of that, to make "the mindless masses" - pay the tiniest bit of attention, you basically have to engage in lying (propaganda, hype, popularity contests). It's politics, where "followers" don't even see the "followed" as people, but ideas, feelings and soundbites. And they don't care. People on the small web, i think, want more- deeper, than those not even surface level connections.

Following "for the lulz" seems like something I'd categorize more 'large web' actually, in my opinion. The moment you stop seeing others as PEOPLE, but as entertainment, as "a way to pass the time" you are in BIG WEB territory. And yes, that includes those "lowest places on the alt internet" (likely referring to Kiwi Farms). Just because they are on the "fringes" of the web, doesn't make them or their approaches to connecting with others any less mainstream. In fact, I'd proclaim them VERY mainstream on that front and argue that it's the "other side of the same coin". While the Personal Web is another coin altogether, in my opinion. I actually have a blog post regarding that very "for the lulz" attitude: My Lolcow & Me

So I think you have 2 different concepts here and I'm going to tackle the easier one first: The concept of the old web or more popularly known as 'The Yesterweb' (the largest of that movement) is only one way to look at the small web space. While I do think there's an abundance of nostalgia and melancholy regarding the way the web used to be, I also think its incorrect to brush off everyone in the space as simply wanting to "return to monke". Much more likely, based on my own experience / feelings, is that their was a certain vibe / culture that manifested as result of how the web used to be and people on the personal web are interested in moving more towards it. The literal interpretation of "version-restoring" the internet to how it used to be I would say is incorrect.

Finally, for your more (personally) interesting take: "specific types of people who are plugged into the lowest places on the alt internet) and you're escalating yourself into Internet Drama land the more you solidify an identity in these kinds of spaces. You would be better off on the mainstream Internet, as much as it sucks."

HA! F-E-A-R. That is what you are hinting at! To F-E-A-R the Kiwi Farms, or any other of similar ilk! Which is ironic in that it's the same kinda message the mainstream web uses to try and kill Kiwi Farms itself with. "Beware the boogeymen! Trust us and our corporate walled-gardens! For we are the true Edens and T-H-E-Y are the imposters! They will declare war on you as they have declared war on us!"

And probably yes, they will, again that "for the lulz" philosophy is quite troublesome, quite chaotic. But to say that we are better off with the corporations?! With the politicians?! With the influencers?! Wow...

Look:

It's cool. I know I came on here somewhat attacking ideas that are probably important to you. I don't really want to take it away from you with my discomfort and paranoia. One thing I figured out after being on the small web for a while is that I almost would rather be ignored than sucked up into the drama of a small space where everyone knows who I am.

It's a confusing kind of existence. And I wouldn't necessarily wish it on you.

I guess my main advice from my own experiences would be to enjoy your freedom, but take care not to be too different from the people around you. You might discover that you don't like being noticed as much as you thought.

I appreciate your concern, and what you're trying to say. A sort-of: "Be careful what you wish for", yes? And I agree with you in the sense of 'the pursuit of fame' and you're additionally specific regarding "internet fame". But I don't think you've quite understood me. I do not chase fame / notoriety / attention. No, that is not my game at all. I (and I believe others in this space) seek connection. Authentic, sincere, wholehearted, personal, intimate, real- connection. And, yes, there's something to be said for seeking that digitally / online, rather than exclusively IRL. But that's another discussion entirely.

As for: "take care not to be too different from the people around you." Again, friend, that is a "BIG WEB" mindset. On the Personal Web, as in Life, every single person is a world onto themselves. What you ask is an impossibility. And a potentially concerning one at that, but I don't mean to dig at you nor pry.

I know this is from another thread, but it evokes a rather nihilistic perception / mindset. Again, potentially concerning. I hope all is well. You also mentioned feeling paranoid and uncomfortable, and a strong dislike for drama. You mentioned being the type to bite their tongue, hold back their thoughts and feelings if it meant avoiding trouble / getting banned / causing drama. But I believe, "drama"... conflict... it's a part of life, an inevitably of communication. And that, perhaps, the best attitude with regards to the struggle is in doing our best to deal with it, to learn from it, to grow from it, to go through it, rather than to avoid it entirely. But I understand how it can be painful... but I don't believe you should let your fear of it dominate you, friend.

I do not share your idealism. And I'm not asking for anything.

It is. I do not share your concern.

I feel like we maybe got off on the wrong foot or something. My original post wasn't intended to be an attack on your way of thinking. It was just me expressing mine. I'm here, yet I'm not comfortable here. The most likely end result is I will disappear after I've reached a maximum amount of discomfort, and I will temporarily be somewhere else with a different name.

My world view is not the same as yours. If that concerns you then I'm sorry.

I don't believe it's possible to have meaningful connections on the Internet. I'm sure you think this is nihilistic but it's just reality. I've wasted enough energy in my life falsely believing in online community and friendship.

Then what is the Internet useful for? A good laugh, sharing an interest in hobbies, and having a good time temporarily. To me that Internet is a temporary distraction. It's not a surrogate for living. And it's certainly not a place where everything should be gravely serious all the time.

I came here because this place was on the Something Awful forums and the software looks cool. As a programmer myself I appreciate it and see the influences in it. That's enough for me. I don't need a manifesto on saving the world by being on the Internet. I think that's nonsense.

"The Internet Makes You Stupid"

It would have been so much easier to have contained conversations about these subjects in the individual threads instead of putting your own spin on what I've said in different threads. But I guess since we have to do this now.

You're referring to this. You didn't grow up on Something Awful in the y2k era. You would get banned for literally anything. You could get banned for posting a meme that everyone was posting yesterday that today the mods decided was old news. The context of that time period has nothing to do with today or now.

I believe we have more in common than it might seem, friend: The Neon God It's a blog post I wrote for a writing club where the theme was 'Digital Relationships'. I don't disagree with you there... but neither do I 100% agree:

Yes... there is something to be said / potential case made for abandoning the internet entirely. But I think that is an interesting exploration the Personal Web / Small Web movement is undertaking: Challenging the conventional, most mainstream ways of being online. I don't think it's wrong to think that when most people want to "quit the internet" they're talking about the "BIG WEB" / social media / etc. Look, maybe you're right, that the Internet is fundamentally flawed, intrinsically a blight on the human experience. But I don't think it's crazy to consider that maybe it's a hell of "our own" making. And perhaps there are some aspects worth keeping... I don't know, friend.

You know, I believe comfort is also another "BIG WEB" concept. How the "algorithms" constantly, unconditionally cater to you. Anything to keep you on it, to keep you with it. I think it reflects a societal prevalence of hedonism, propagated, in part, by nihilistic / post-modern ideas / philosophies. And I do find it concerning. I too do not write this as an attack on your way of thinking; just me expressing mine. But I understand if that is not enough to keep you from returning to its warm, tender embrace.

So you're telling me that during your adolescent / developmental years you spent time in a place where you experienced a highly volatile and unpredictable environment online and you don't believe that could have had any effect / anything to do with why you're so tight-knit / low-key / distrusting / "paranoid" online in the present day?