I'm troubled by this thread. These are my impressions, which are not judgement calls, but concerns:
1) There is the tacit assumption of a quid pro quo; you comment on my posts, I'll return the favour. Clearly this means when we don't play by other people's rules, we don't get what we want.
2) What do we want? Attention and approval seem more important than feedback, tips, learning...
3) Quantity appears more important than quality.
Please read this comment carefully. I am *NOT* saying this is what the contributors above believe. I *AM* saying that it can be assumed from the above that the best PB experience is high-volume comments, frequent posts and minimum feedback in terms of content, but maximum quantity - in other words: chatter.
Furthermore, it appears you have to play by these rules or you're excluded.
Doesn't that worry anyone?
Cliques die when there's nothing to renew them and this may explain this site's relative stability in an activity that measures growth exponentially (FB and PB and contemporaries...).
Incidentally, I checked the OP's profile. To date he's posted 2.5 times more comments than he's received, which rather contradicts many of the helpful comments above. I suspect long absences make it difficult to maintain the PB variety of virtual friendships, unlike the flesh-and-blood kind.
I was hoping that the Internet's increasingly global scope would bring the old model to an end, with groups here conversing in Hindi or Portuguese and sharing a huge variety of fascinating landscapes or portraits. I was hoping the site was broad enough to welcome any kind of photography from casual food & family snappers to professionals and concept artists. It looks like I'm wrong and that's why, among other reasons, I no longer post images as revenant.
Earlier this year I made a joke about the new Photoblog keyboard, which looks like this:
Well, I'm not laughing any more.
I hope the OP comments on our feedback. I'm curious to understand what he thinks.