> Oh, I understand what you're saying.
>
> >Talking smack about the NHL playoffs: livejournal; Questioning the value of prayer: Rinkworks.
>
> But, for example, say someone posts in a thread about the value of prayer, and basically the only responses would be "I agree" or something short along those lines. So nobody replies because they don't want to write such a short post, and the person may feel that their post wasn't good because it didn't get any replies.

I think that's just an inescapable fact of the way this forum works. If people are insecure about themselves and take this as a sign of disinterest, that's unfortunate, but I don't see a solution. Maybe if people, upon seeing a post that really interests them, took a moment to think of something constructive to say in reply -- something that moves beyond an "I agree" post and into extending the topic -- that would guard against this. (I've done that on occasion, though definitely not as a rule.) It all comes back to investing in the forum in the first place.

I think I'm less concerned about the state of the forum than of chat, however. Still, I'm all ears for discussion of either.