What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Audition for 2009 Holiday Campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy0 - The making of Best Buy's holiday campaign. Real employees 'Jingle Belling' their way to a stardom.
34 Comments
- diafel, on 10/12/2007, -17/+25Yawn, it's yet another aaaz article fraudulently dugg to the front page by his team of gaming douchebags. It's really amazing how prevalent these guys are.
- omgitscolin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10You guys are right, that's a pretty ***** way to get to the front page... but I think this is something people (or at least Californians) should hear about, so I dugg it. Disclaimer: I don't know aaaz, nor did he ask me to digg this.
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I live in Cali and I've been watching these ads for months. The law prevents oil companies from passing the tax burden onto the people of California through price-hikes. When the Yes on 87 people pointed out their *****, the ads were pulled and I haven't seen a new one in weeks. The Yes on 87 people pulled their own ads debunking the No on 87 myths and replaced them with a Clinton speech on how great the law is. So that's been on heavy rotation for the recent past.
- franksmith, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Higher taxes are not going to help ANYTHING
- Glidedon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8This is another law to make the situation worse.
Old Laws:
We can't drill anywhere
No new refineries
Dozens of formulations of gas
No new nuclear Plants - Slugo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I'm voting a big "NO" ....so were going to tax big oil and tell them not to pass it on to the consumer and trust the that politicians keep the oil Co. in check....LOL...right...like I'm going to trust big oil and politicians with any more of my money. In fact I'm voting "NO" on all the bond and tax hike issues.
- omgitscolin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8But the thing is, the money would fund alternative energy research. That's probably what scares the oil companies, and the reason they don't want it passed. We have to stop using oil sooner or later (even if it doesn't run out, it's just plain bad) and our dependence is such that we need alternatives rather than just cutting back. But what happens to those huge companies when nobody wants to buy what they're selling?
- centinall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They had a great debate about this on NPR the other morning (if someone could find the link to either the audio or a transcript, that would be great). I'm really never on the side of the oil companies, but I have to say that the guy arguing against this proposition (oil company representative) made excellent point after point. Taxing oil produced in California while leaving oil produced in other states or countries has many negative side effects. Jobs lost in California, potential increase and dependency in consumption of foreign oil, why create another agency like this when one already exists, etc... The other good point that was made was the fact that there's little oversight or transparency into how this money will be used. The proponent of the proposition really didn't convince me otherwise. Like I said, I usually would just be against anything that oil companies have to say, but this, I can easily say is the exception.
- Hoovooloo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11Wow... techie3 and diafel have post posted the exact same comments on 2 recent aaaz stories, and looking at his comments, it seems like diafel is stalking aaaz with negative comments. Also, techie3 joined TODAY, and is already complaining about about digg being "gamed." JUST SHUT UP ALREADY! Enough people like their stories that they get dugg to the front page. Get over it.
- evgen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@omgiscolin: Have you actually read the propostion? It is something like 30 pages of good intentions, poor economics, and a heaping helping of government hand-out to alternative energy firms; firms like the ones one of the chief backers of the proposition (Vinod Khosla) has been fronting VC cash to.
I like the basic intention of the initiative, but it is poorly structured and the self-serving nature of Mr. Khosla's participation is going to make me vote against it. - spahn, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8actually it's more like they're campaigning against a tax hike on oil produced in California that would in turn make us more reliant on oil produced elsewhere.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Boo ***** hoo. $2+ a gallon? I drive a freaking 1973 Cadillac Eldorado, 500 fat American cubic inches, and get 6 mpg, and my gas bill is still cheaper than the INSURANCE on a damn Prius. GAS IS CHEAP, STUPID.
- stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Unfortunately, so many people are trying to game Digg right now, one pretty much has to indulge in that to get anything promoted at all. It’s like professional bodybuilding and steroids: You don’t really have a choice, if you want to compete. Aaaz tends to submit good content, and I often digg it, though I realize I probably only ever get the opportunity because it’s been gamed to the top of the pile. I have given up submitting articles myself, as I don’t have the time to game the system.
- geekuskhan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've dugg aaaz submissions several times and I can honestly say it's not because he asked me to. I've never communicated with anyone about what stories to digg.
He just submits a crapload of articles. You just happen to disagree with them.
Maybe you should submit your own instead of reading the ones you don't like. - centinall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Sorry, can't find the audio, but this is the story.
Thu, Aug 24, 2006
The California Report 2006-08-24
Prop 87 Opponents Sue Supporters Over Web Addresses
Proposition 87 would tax oil producers and use the money to develop alternative energy programs. Oil companies -- led by Chevron, Shell and Exxon -- are funding opposition to Prop 87. But supporters of the measure, with financial help from deep pockets in Hollywood and Silicon Valley, have put up a roadblock in cyberspace. They are using domain names indicating opposition to Prop 87, but linking them to a site in support of it.
Reporters:
Scott Shafer
http://www.californiareport.org/domains/californiareport/archive/R608240850/b - megaloid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't drive and I dislike the oil companies, but damn, a '73 Eldorado. Mad style. If someone gave me one of those, I'd probably start driving again just to be seen in it.
- krosk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4There's a problem. You can't legislate that oil company's can't pass on the increased cost onto consumers. That's just business. Cost gets passed onto the consumers, that's how business works. If Prop 87 passes, the oil companies will sue in federal court. It's an ICC issue, and does not apply solely to California. Oil from California gets exported to many states, and then it becomes a federal issue not a state issue. 87 is worthless.
- Doofy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Vote NO on anything that remotely smells like a tax on anything.
Politicians can't be trusted with the money. - theJRK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Good luck with that. Unless you're interested in saving the world from the mighty CO2 monster, you're not likely to save anything. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/high-cost-of-hybrid-vehicles-406/overview/index.htm
- Ironcitizen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Tax big oil and tell them not to pass it on to the consumer? How is that supposed to work? Where does the money come from to pay the tax?
- Aidenag, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Jesus Christ Aaaz........ quit duping people.................................... its really not that hard to at least keep track of what the top 10 users on digg submit... and make sure u arent repeating us....
http://www.digg.com/politics/Calif_Ballot_Battle_Over_Big_Oil_May_Be_Costliest_in_U_S_History - DirtyBrowncoat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes, because Ahnold has been so successful in keeping gasoline prices down here. The tax WILL be passed down to the consumer despite the feel-good intentions of politicians in Sacramento.
And after the number of financial debacles the State Legislature has gotten themselves into, I can't seem to trust them with one more red cent. - Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5After looking through his stories submitted more, a majority of them were actually linked from thinkprogress.org as well. He is actually very smart and is totally getting around the changes that they made to digg.com to try and stop this type of behavior. They put in a new algorithm, so that one person couldnt just submit articles from the same website every ten seconds, so he follows their links to their sources and varies it up a bit.
And he would've gotten away with it if it wasn't for those meddling kids. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10While I'm not a fan of gaming digg... aaaz at least seems to have good intentions. It's difficult to see how his posts would make him any money.
So yeah, his method of getting front page articles is bad... but I actually like knowing about the articles he posts. - titlesaysitall, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3techie3 was tharub3x, he has been here for a long time.
- snowbdr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If we do not make a huge effort to research alternative fuels, then we will never free ourselves from the chains of the Middle East. We need to create new industries here in California. Just imagine how the California economy would be if the dot.coms were all based in Alabama? This is an opportunity that we need to take, warts and all. We can fix problems as we go along, but if we shoot down everything just because it's not absolutely perfect then we'll stay in a quagmire forever.
Vote YES on 87 - brendanc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Stonebear, ever think that someone might create a new account so that the people they're complaining about don't know who they are?
Didn't think that one through... - Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4http://rikki-tikki-tavis-garden.blogspot.com/
He is most likely a paid operative of thinkprogress.org. It is their new initiative to take over digg. Like almost all of their other top employees, shown in that article, they are told to digg their stories to the top of digg to gain more exposure for their site. Almost half of aaaz's stories are from thinkprogress.org.
Check this out - http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/23/think-digg/
They are telling their people to artificially jack up the diggs on an article. Theirs your information. - knuckles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Americans should care more about proposition 89 than proposition 87. Vote for 89 and 87 just "goes away", at least that's how I'm interpreting it.
http://www.cleanmoneyelections.org/ - ramaz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I'm thinking strongly about buying a hybrid car ... what if we all started demanding hybrids? The problem is, in the short term that would drive the price up, and the price difference is already too great.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3i think the clinton ad is the best one because its the most positive. the others are all FUD
- jumanous, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1That just retarded.. why would he back that proposition. Alternative fuels can be made already, they don't need to be researched, there just needs to be more money put into getting biofuels companies off the ground.
- Calypsoaf, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Even though the article states that gas prices in California would not be raised if such legislation is passed, the 2+ dollars a gallon I pay every week make me less that sure about a positive vote on such bill. Unfortunately, my wallet will have to vote no on this measure, no matter how much a blogger tells me there is no reason to fear it.
- 1911wolf, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Marked as Spam just like all the other TP bunk. Last thing I want is another cult pimping more damned taxes.
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