Change in computers as a hobbiest... 2861

Yes, it's certainly possible, but not quite as likely as on a traditional dial-up BBS with local discussion areas. The last time I checked, my ISP had a selection of over 65000 newsgroups on their news server. The local BBSes I used to frequent usually topped at around 30. (I'm only counting the local areas here, not those that were part of some FidoNet-style messaging network.) The chances of finding the same people from within 30 fairly general groups are somewhat greater than finding them scattered among 65000 highly specialized groups.

In some respects, yes. (That's a good observation, actually - I even hang around on a couple of IRC channels which are strictly local in their nature. Now that I think of it, in some ways they do act as a subsbreastute for the local BBS.)

But real-time chatting is not really the same as pondering things and typing multi-paragraph messages at your own pace. In real-time chats, all participants need to be actively monitoring the channel at (roughly) the same time. (Yes, there are technical ways around this but for the purposes of having an intelligent discussion, the participants still mostly need to be present at the same time even if some individuals take the liberty of logging the discussion and commenting on it later.)

In-depth discussions are somewhat hindered by the immediacy of the medium: people will have to wait for your answers, and if you're too slow with thinking or typing them, the discussion can easily drift away to some other topic (or it might already have ended because some of the key participants called it a day and left the channel.) You can't take too much time to think things through or you'll miss your window of opportunity to comment.

This is in contrast to Usenet or BBS-style messaging where that "window of opportunity" is a much more flexible concept. On Usenet, or a dial-up BBS, you don't have to follow the discussion in real time, and can easily postpone your comments for days - even for weeks - if you're busy at doing some other things. You can also take all the time you need for properly thinking through the matter before sending in your comment, or perhaps do some research about it before answering.

The technical limitations of the messages should also be considered: Usenet and dial-up BBSes allow for long, multi-paragraph messages, easily conveying more complex and detailed thoughts than would ever be possible to present (or even formulate) in a real-time discussion on an IRC channel, or in a "chat room".

Sure. But as noted above, the immediacy of the medium doesn't easily lend itself to intelligent or thoughtful discussion - at least not in the same way as the old-school BBSes or Usenet do. Discussions in real-time systems have the tendency of degenerating into light banter, knee-jerk reactions and witty one-liners.

There's nothing wrong with that; it can all be fun in its own right - and I'm not saying there couldn't be exceptions to the rule (because there are, from time to time) - but on a general level, real-time discussion systems lack the technical facilities for "deep" discussions. In these systems, quick, snappy, cleverly worded and paced, or humorous comments are usually rewarded better than thoughtful ideas which take some time to formulate or research. It's a bit like the difference between movies and books. In movies, if you blink, you missed it and there's no going back (or at least going back would disrupt the flow and annoy others.) Books allow you to take your time and nurture your thoughts before coming to conclusions.

-- znark