True about the threaded discussions, i always felt threaded conversations lead to worse quality discussions. Mostly because of the "argument"-thing. I don't think people intentionally want to start an argument many times but since you are always replying directly to someone it can easily be perceived as offensive or defensive even if you are just adding another neutral fact into the conversation.
Actually "conversation" sounds wrong, because there is no conversation or even common red-line of discussion, just replies to individual comments changing order several times per day based on some rating instead of time. Try returning to a threaded conversation a day after you first read it, you will have to reread almost everything again to get back into the loop again.
Flat comment system can also deteriorate quickly when you reach enough users and everything is just lost into a stream of junk like on youtube. I think stackoverflow has a good model with only one level of threading, not sure how well it would work on a discussion forum without strictly right or wrong answers though.
Actually "conversation" sounds wrong, because there is no conversation or even common red-line of discussion, just replies to individual comments changing order several times per day based on some rating instead of time. Try returning to a threaded conversation a day after you first read it, you will have to reread almost everything again to get back into the loop again.
Flat comment system can also deteriorate quickly when you reach enough users and everything is just lost into a stream of junk like on youtube. I think stackoverflow has a good model with only one level of threading, not sure how well it would work on a discussion forum without strictly right or wrong answers though.