What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
106 Comments
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -9/+42You seem to be discussing 'feature' issues as opposed to actual design issues. Digg is extremely well designed. It's very clean, understated, and enjoyable to use. They've done an excellent job of keeping focus on the content and making it easy to get to the content that is relevant to the user. Ultimately that is what is important.
I do see your point about the issues with ranking users. It's a catch 22. On one hand it provides recognition for contributors and motivates them to feed the system with content. On the other hand, some users become so wrapped up in the 'top user' status that they care less about the content and more about their ranking which leads to the natural exploitation or 'gaming' of the system. Luckily, Digg is usually very responsive to make the necessary adjustments to ensure the integrity of their system. And that makes for a better digging experience overall. - ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -7/+38I really don't give a damn who submitted the story. All I care about is the content. If the content is ok, I'll digg it no matter who the poster is.
- RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -14/+42ICSU, you're missing the point. Digg is Rigged. The 1337s can submit a big steaming pile and all their compadres will digg them into the stratosphere. Us regular guys can submit the first eyewitness report of the Second Coming and get a handful of diggs that will never make it to the front page. If you don't believe me, go to the coverage of, say, yesterday's Apple announcements. Must have been half a zillion Diggers submitting the same story. The only ones that made it to front page were the 1337s. Even though they were not the first submitters or even linking to the more indepth stories. Now do you get it?
Digg Is Rigged.
Digg Is Rigged.
Digg Is Rigged.
Digg Is Rigged.
Digg Is Rigged. - RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -15/+40Better Digging experience? Are we on the same site???
Look, you or I can submit a world scoop on Britney's baby having 666 etched in its head and we're gonna get five diggs and disappear. Any of the Digg 1337s can submit a story about the new Manhattan telephone book being six pages longer than last year and it's gonna be on the front page in a couple of hours.
Digg is a crooked casino. They'd have to have to algorithmize themselves into a coma before it would be fair. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21I think the term "design" still applies here, although I did think the story was going to be able the layout, colors, etc.
- RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Why the hell should we have a team of "friends" to digg our stories??? Wasn't this supposed to be based on the merit of the story, rather than the hyperthyroid high school clique system? Look at me! I'm captain of the football team! I get all the chix! I'm ultra-popular! I get all my stories on the front page! GAG!
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14In the end I don't think it's even worth talking about ditching design features like the friend's system, ranking, "who dugg this story", etc. Kevin/Jay seems to have their minds made up about the matter, and God himself couldn't couldn't sway them.
Last week a lot of people were calling for an end to the friend's system, and it was probably the #1 solution people came up with to end gaming on Digg. But just today the "My #1" feature was added, which makes it even easier for your friends to spot the articles you really want dugg.
This shows that Kevin/Jay are going to do whatever they want regardless of how the broader community feels about it. Rather than taking everyone's suggestions into consideration, and possibly trying to curve friend auto-digging, they are reinforcing it. - Whitey04, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13You can design anything from a plane to the layout of a website. There is back end software and it has a design too.
There was "design" before web 2.0 you know. - ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Just ignore posts you don't like and digg the ones you do. It's that simple.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14"so kevin should refer to you before doing anything?"
When a site like Digg claims to be user driven... then yeah, I would expect them to listen to their users when making decisions. - epilonious, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@InternetUser
Oh Please. There are enough people that kneejerk hate on stories submitted by top users (first comments being things like "stop digging each other's stories you little *****"). So advocating this need to be vicious to people that just have more time and find semi-good stuff just enforces this silly "there is a caste system in place and there needs to be a revolution" notion.
I like my digg without whine. - SlackerCS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Can we get a "Digg.com" topic and dump all these stories in there so I can ignore them all at once? I come here to read the news, not news about the site itself.
- COBOLdinosaur, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12"can't we just see real news and articles? "
Sure as soon as "WE" have the site instead of a handful of elites who put whatever crap they run across on the front page. The good stuff gets buried if it is not submitted by the inner circle; except when one of them hijacks a story that was posted by someone else so they can give it a different title and have the KR cadre Digg it to the top.
If you don't want crap then get rid of the crap mongers. Maybe it is time of a real revolution. A thousand non-elite little guys monitoring a list of stuff posted and giving it hundreds of diggs within minutes of being posted. Any kind of crap will do do perhaps a demonstration that if it is going to be mob rule, then mob rule by the inner circle can be countered by a bigger mob of the outsiders.
Maybe the only way to settle this is with a Digg civil war to see which side can raise the biggest army to post the most crap to the front page.
OR...
They fix the design; kick the gamers in the ass; and give the site back to all the users, not just a handful of freaks with and aggregator on their Blackberry. - amnezia, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11The title's perfectly appropriate. Systems are designed, applications are designed, engineering is designed, etc, etc, not only visual layouts.
- xiralc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10The only people this really matters to are the people who care about how high they are on the ranking.
The focus should always be on the content not the user, who cares if you're the top digger or if your user name is read out on Diggnation?
If everyone focused on content and not the status we'd all be happy campers - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Ah yes, there's that short attention span that prevents anything worthwhile from every happening, or changing.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"I really don't give a damn who submitted the story. All I care about is the content. If the content is ok, I'll digg it no matter who the poster is."
The problem is that the people gaming the system are keeping stories which you might genuinely be interested in away from the front page by getting their stuff up there - cbiz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6For ther most part I have never concerned myself with learning who posts a story. Over time I have learned about the status factor on digg and it has caused me to to hand out very few diggs for popular stories. My ranking algorithm says why should I help someone who does not need help.
- WoCoL33t, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Last time I checked, Digg was a site that allowed users to search through their large user submitted database for stories and keep up-to-date with what is happening in the world. I could care less about this "gaming" problem. Digg is not a "game" (you don't call sitting down at the dinner table a game..) Even if people are getting their stories sent to the homepage through their friends' help, you are still getting good stories on the front page..
- ray901, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Some people just don't seem to grasp the basic idea behind digg.
If you don't like the way digg is being run then simply quit using digg for a month or so (would it kill you to do that). Find your news elsewhere, really sometimes I think that some people never read anything before digg and could not survive without it.
If everyone who is pissed off with how digg works walked away, digg would change how they do things. BUT, you have to walk away, using digg to complain about digg just increases the site traffic - the holy grail of sites like this. - ThirdPrize, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So, democracy doesn't work. What else is new?
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I don't think you understand who the system works. Once a story has about 10 diggs, it starts to sit pretty high on the "Upcoming stories" list, and it starts to get attention. It snow balls. So it only takes you, and nine other people to influence the system.
You have even more influence when you, and those nine other people, are very highly ranked, because then your diggs count more than most other people's diggs. That means it takes even less diggs for your story to hit the front page.
It really only takes a dozen high ranking diggers to push a story to the front page. - RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12You wanna fix Digg? Here's how you do it. Easy.
1) Throw the submission algorithms in the friggin' toilet. They were an idiotic idea to start with.
2) If you submit a story that fits X number of terms used in any other story in the past week it doesn't go on at all. Period. First one up's best dressed.
3) Once you digg a submitter's story your subsequent diggs on that same submitter's other stories are blocked for a random number between 5 and 15 stories. This way you can't just submit 5 junk stories knowing that your 6th is going to get the diggs from all your adoring fans.
If anyone needs this explained further, just ask. And this can be implemented by Digg for the token royalty payment of one million US dollars. Thank you.:) - MaddDog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I have a much simplier solution. The problem is that the same users are always getting promoted by the same people. Just make it more difficult to do so.
Limit the number of submitted stories per day. There's no reason that anyone should be submitting more than 1 story per day, given the extremely large user base of Digg.
Combine this with the suggestion that you can only digg a certain user's submission once every 7 days, and presto, you will impose a very difficult restriction on particular users to influence digg.
Its very possible that these ideas are being used in the recent changes. But there are almost an infinite number of ways that you can limit the influence of small groups. Never 100 eliminated, but even 95% elimination would be a great assistance to the rest of us. - RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Thanks for the agreement, jriley. Now, garraeth, just go to http://digg.com/topusers and your eyes will pop out.
StellarBay has submitted 28 and gone front page with 27. Ya. Like that's likely.
frgmstr is 40 out of 50.
Both sahaskatta and DarkHack are in the hundreds and well over 60%.
p9s50W5k4GUD2c6 has submitted 1344 and gone front with exactly half.
CLIFFosakaJAPAN has submitted 4118, which given that Digg was launched in December 2004 means that he has submitted more than 6.5 stories a day since Day One! What the hell, does this guy never go out for noodles?
This is the profile of a scam... - RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I'm with you, CobolDino! :)
Let's storm the Digg office! Hang Kevin in effigy! Vive le Digg Libre! :P - MobbyG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think there is something to the Digging of stories to "bookmark" them for viewing later. Yes, you could undigg a story later after you have read it and don't agree under that premise, but I think a bookmark with say a limit of 100 or maybe less would fix that. IMO people are inherently lazy unless well motivated.
You wouldn't be able to add any more saved stories till you went through and either dugg them or removed them. The My #1 feature is nice, but I don't think it's design was for this kind of situation. - Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The only reasons the friends feature is here is because some people don't have any friends outside of Digg (other than WoW).
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@amnezia
You aren't a designer, obviously. I am. This is should be in programming or industry news. It doesn't really belong here. I am so tired of having to sift through content like this just to get to the handful of meaningful and relevant articles for this section, most of which never make it to the front page. You know what does make it to the front page of the design section? I will tell you. CRAP like a graphic of star wars characters imitating the last supper and a freakin article about a bike helmet that helps you avoid potholes.
end rant. - MrBrightside, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I agree, digg is kinda losing its appeal with me too. I like using it is a source of opinions on current news, but as for submitting content myself - well ive given up trying! - when ever i find a story and try to submit it it seems someone has submitted like a day or so ago! - Then if it finally does get posted, it never gets more than a few diggs! - therefore I let the sad bastards that seem to control this site submit the stuff and I just post sarcastic comments like this!
- MrStylz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I agree, and will get dug down with you.
I like a LOT of the content that gets dugg up. I think that a lot of the complaints are by whiners whose story doesn't get promoted. Ya, so I won't see stories about Britney's baby (see below), but I will also ignore the stupid ones. If anything, Digg v3 has made it much easier to find stories I'm interested in.
I am sick of hearing about the "Democratic Nature" of Digg. Part of the reason incumbants win year after year is because of thier *name* and that they were in office before. Sometimes it doesn't matter if they do a bad job, if they've been in office for years, they'll get votes.
Digg is still Digg and if a story is GOOD ENOUGH it WILL get promoted...who cares by who?
I only have like 6 "friends", so my stories stand less of a chance, but I won't sit around and cry b/c they don't get promoted...or even if a dupe gets in and goes up. I found them, liked them and shared them. As far as Digg is concerned, I care about the stories, not the people who submit them. - jls8705, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The basic idea of digg is for ALL users to have a say in what become the most popular and are therefore the best quality/most interesting stories.
When you have a buddy system going, it discourages guys like me who know that our stories, regardless of how interesting they are, will never see the light of day. That's wrong. No excuses.
If there were a way to level the playing field a bit, you would have more quality stories getting to the front page at a faster pace, which is the ideal for this system. And right now, with this system, that is not going to happen.
The creators of this site need to figure something out to make it fair. It's their job. - alonerawnut, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I agree with ray901 - if you don't like the way digg is designed, then just don't use it. If there's a less-than-interesting story on the front page that's been put there by gaming diggers, rather than by mass opinion, just don't read it.
I think that the ability to be able to check out what your friends have dugg is so useful that it outweighs any disadvantages. - RegisPhilbin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Kbarrett, you're right. Besides, if there's one kid with 666 on its head it's Suri Cruise. :)
- kyriakos, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10Nobody cares who posted a story or who dugg it, if someone likes the topic or story he will digg it as well.
The digg model works perfectly for a userbase of an optimum size. Digg has increased in size in the past few months and the model is breaking down so changes must be introduced. For example if you check the article queue through the cloud view you'll see that the articles no longer fit in a single page, many stories get burried before the majority of the users have the chance to check them out while some manage to get to the top even if only a very small proportion of the userbase has seen them. I believe the designer(s) noticed this and tried to fix it but what happened is that a lag was introduced, digg's front page had the latest articles moved to front page lot quicker than it does now - although stories do get posted multiple times in the queue it sometimes takes 24 hours or more to see them on the front page which spoils the whole experience of being the most up to date source. - t4k3n, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm in.. haha
This site is on all day every day for me home and work..
I vote that we get rid of these Diggtators, and that my cat smells good and is pretty! - bewarethejubjub, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Sign me up to this revolution!
Let's start a megagroup posting stories about kittens in trees and the heartbreak of psoriasis.
Yeah!!!! That'll show 'em where the real power is! - garraeth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thanks for the link!
So everyone bury any posts by any of those people!
*oh, and "those people"...don't forget to bury this message* - TheKillDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Best idea yet.
Now if we can get a filter for products you don't want to read that would be cool too! (my list would = ipod,apple,itunes) - WoCoL33t, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It went up just yesterday I believe.
- laserone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is why I NEVER look at the front page anyway. The only pages I look at are the top stories for the day/week/month. The front page is useless to me.
http://digg.com/topstories/today - johnnyrocket, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Right on! I just don't get the story submissions. Hundred and hundreds of stories are submitted every hour...so how could ANY one of them just pop up to the top without some coordinated scheme, its ALL rigged, and it's NOT generally user driven.
- Vandelay797, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I Sort of agree with this guy, there are a few good ideas. " Exposing who diggs what
At the bottom of each digged entry is a list of people who have dugg it, "
But he is just a cynical ***** . for the record> i dont digg this artical. Have you ever read a post that was about a something that make you angry, then gone ahead and dugg it? you dont agree with what the artical is saying but you want others to see it so they can be frustrated by it too. digg should add a rating sytem. a scale of 1-5 . this guy is a jackass - mason.parker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Man who ***** cares bokardo?
- redlaser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2anyone else get that green "MY=1" button alongside the title that chabges to "saved" when clicked. ?
how long has it been there. - WoCoL33t, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I do agree with that.. I mean, I could have an important story that was cool, but it never sees the light of day. On the other hand, someone elses dinky story goes on the frontpage with 44 diggs..
- meman2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Stats on # of diggs that a story has received, who has dugg what, etc, should be reserved to the homepage. All diggs on the upcoming pages should be private in order to prevent group-mentality from affecting whether or not a story is truly homepage-worthy. Digging a story because it has a lot of diggs already or because your friends dugg it is retarded and is probably a big factor here in promoting stories.
- Surreal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So, the argument is to take out the very features that we use and appreciate the most!? No digg.
- MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think Digg knows what they are doing.
- Ninjamonk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2no you misunderstood what I said.
I do not believe the digg company is involved in front page rigging. I have heard Kevin saying that they have done alot of work to stop it. I do believe it was interview on DL.TV sometime back.
I also can't believe I got dugg down for my comments there are some real trolls on here. what in my previous comments were bad???? This is getting like /. -
Show 51 - 100 of 106 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is