If I was new to the forums, I would be overwhelmed with the amount of threads and posts in each thread.
Now this is just a suggestion, but can a group of dedicated members make a superthread for each main topic: BLD Cubing, solving methods, popular topics covered in puzzle theory (e.g. probability thread), best DIY kits, etc., and a very organized miscellaneous thread? (Once a topic becomes big enough in the miscellaneous thread, then the information on it can be deleted the misc. thread and made into a new superthread).
If these superthreads were created, I would expect that they would be "No-reply Threads," because the idea is to have threads which list every question that has been asked about every derivative topic of a specific branch of cubing and then lists an answer (or answers) for it without there being more questions being asked.
No the wiki is not the answer for this because anyone can edit the wiki and there is always a disclaimer with the wiki anyway.
These threads would contain more than just the most commonly asked questions: they would contain every question ever asked on the forums along with the best answer(s).
We cannot at any means decide which questions to include by thinking that one was a good question but another was an unnecessary one (unless it's really obvious why).
It seems like many members are sincere to attempt to post his or her opinion on what the best cubes are, for example, but there is consistently disagreement between them and other members to some degree (which definitely will make the person asking for help even more confused and therefore not really helped in any way). So why don't the people deemed to be experts and experienced just write the correct answer in an easily accessible thread? If there is more than one answer (meaning that all of the answers are good, but differ because of the "everyone is different" argument), then that should be specified.
The forums are continuously expanding without bounds. Older threads will be forgotten over time (not to mention that for non-members, they cannot see threads before a certain date), so why not make the best out of them?
Look at it this way, if you had five minutes to figure out one specific how to solve a (difficult) math problem for a test, would you (when all of these options are available):
A) Try to attempt it yourself with no promise of you actually getting it on time.
B) Look through the text with no promise that it will explain a specific detail to you in a language that you can understand when you are under pressure.
C) Ask someone who you know is going to ace the test, you know is willing to help, and you know can explain well.
If you answer C (which would be the choice with most promise of success), then that is the same as he or she posting a reply in any existing thread asking his or her question to a group of people who most likely know the answer. Yeah there isn't such a time constraint to get an answer for a topic on cubing, but the key here is to realize the possibility of members (new or already existing) being impatient, being overwhelmed, or just being clueless (one of my many expertise according to the 2009 forum awards).
It's no wonder why some new members (and even existing members) openly apologize for asking a question, because they are aware of the amount of material on the forums (and have seen the rather negative responses to people who ask common questions), but they see what a huge task it would be to read through an enormous thread which may or may not have the question and answer they are looking for.
Also, what about the enormous OQAT? Decoding the OQAT would be a large task, as it has so many replies, but I think it would be much more valuable than the wiki itself for someone to do this because so many questions have been asked and answered.
A Collection of Algorithms Thread and Request an Alg Thread
Also, what about the Collection of Algorithms thread and request an alg threads? The wiki is updated with new algorithms and has a lot of algorithms already, but has every algorithm in those threads been posted in the wiki? If not, then what is the purpose of the Request an Alg Thread if the OAQT exists already? Is it as pointless as the accomplishment thread or is it meant to be a useful resource for all? There are so many posts in these two threads that it gives me a headache to even think about the fact that we expect our members to read through that much.
Additional Item to do if the above is executed
Although this might not even be considered ethical by some, if everything useful (questions, answers and information) from a thread is put into a superthread, then why not delete the thread? If people like their post counts, then maybe there could be a way to not deduct from their post counts (I mean, even as a member I cannot read all the posts I have made since I joined anyway unless I know which threads I have posted in).
Lastly, even if I personally would want to start speedcubing with the intent to beat the Single World Record for a certain puzzle, I would definitely want to see all of the contributions experienced speedcubers have willingly (and sacrificially) have contributed to the forums regarding that. I don't just mean a certain group of algorithms or a lists of tips alone (or even just Brest's reconstructions). Every detail of information ever contributed by anyone who has invested the time should be available, especially if it worked for someone (even though a person's advice might have not worked for most people, if it worked for that person, it might work for me, especially if I have happened to try everything that is displayed as ideal practice).
A final advantage to having these superthreads filled with questions and answers is that it could spark the content presented in the wiki as well. Questions that people have thought to ask certainly can be mentioned in an informative manner in the wiki. This will help all of the wiki contributors see what topic pages to create and all of the details to mention about these topics which is crucial not to leave out.