> 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.

But if somebody posted something that didn't really inspire a lot of thought or provoke a reaction from other people, perhaps it wasn't that great of a post. Alternatively, maybe it was a good post but just wasn't of the nature that requires much conversation. In that latter case, I'm not so sure we should be posting just hoping to get positive feedback.

This isn't creative writing class where everyone critiques everyone else all the time. You post for the sake of writing good posts or getting discussion. If a post that was intended to start discussion does not, then the original post was probably lame. It sucks when you post something like that, but it happens. If you're just writing a funny, amusing or interesting post that doesn't require any responses, then the act of writing that should be reward enough to you. If it doesn't get cut, then it probably wasn't total crap.

If I see a post I really that doesn't inspire me to add any new perspective, but I still really liked, I tend to drop the poster a memo or PM them or send an e-mail message. I think this is a better way to deal with that sort of thing rather than cluttering the Forum with "Me too!" posts.

Stephen