Mike:
Glad you posted this, as I was reflecting on this same subject recently.
I share some of the thoughts expressed here -- I tend to visit the site a bit less that I used to, as I find myself bored with topics that have been hashed over time and again. I have posted (or tried to) a lot less this year, in part because I just don't get out as much..
Some of the site's highlights for me this year included:
-- Folks like Jon Cavalier (well, especially Jon Cavalier) and their continued devotion to extensive course photo threads, which (despite what the naysayers say) are the heart of this website, and require a lot of time to put together.
-- The return of posters like yourself, Kavanaugh, and Shivas -- discussion boards are pretty pointless without a decent variety of viewpoints, and we still have a bunch here (although I still lament the loss of some of the ones that first drew my interest in this site). Relatively new posters have contributed much to the site, particularly historical information.
-- Ran's (really thorough and well-written) reviews of courses like George Wright and Roaring Gap that fall well below the radar of even most of us here.
-- The continued involvement in discussions by real architects, who have actually done the stuff we debate all day. I'm not sure of a comparable level of involvement by such knowledgeable people on other discussion boards. We should all appreciate their contributions and willingness to put up with the rest of us.
Lowlights:
-- The actual discussion board -- in terms of optics and user-friendliness -- continues to be the single worst thing about the site, and it is hands-down one of the worst I view regularly. Revising it -- from the standpoint of users, not software coders or other types -- ought to be the site's top priority next year.
-- Ran should get out more. I count four course reviews this year, or once a season. OK, half in jest, because I'm reluctant to tell anyone to spend more time on what is truly a labor of love. But his reviews are so good, and so in-depth, that I "pine" for more.
-- Posters continually discussing holes and/or courses without pictures. Of course, pictures don't capture the nuance of a particular hole or course, but they are better than nothing. I always default to Ran's reviews -- excellent as they are, they are much the better due to his wonderful photography.
I'll still parrot what Shivas said several years ago -- despite its flaws, this is still hands-down the best golf architecture website on the web, by a fair margin. A solid Doak 7.