What is Digg?147 Comments
- Paktu, on 11/01/2007, -3/+284"We need a new "BURY as HOAX" function!!!"
Or you could just use "bury as inaccurate" like the rest of us. - Shinig4mi, on 11/06/2007, -11/+173Furthermore, it appears as though the comments that describe the story as a hoax are being buried by someone... On the long run, this could affect Digg's credibility.... Maybe the list of users that bury/digg a specific comment should be visible too...
- cizzymac, on 11/01/2007, -1/+120Admittedly, if it were not for the comments of some digg users putting up links to the original video, I would have believed it.
Thanks for helping to get the ***** out of my internets! - mikelieman, on 11/01/2007, -5/+89It would have been so cool watching CNN broadcast a denial.
FIRST they would have to explain WTF goatse is! That would have been worth the price of admission all by itself! - hansonc, on 11/01/2007, -4/+83Digg has credibility? With who?
- FyreGoddess, on 11/01/2007, -5/+62Bury as Inaccurate works to indicate that it's not accurate. Hoax is too strong a word in this particular case, IMO. Bury as Inaccurate marks it as such without removing it from the queue.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -6/+62Yes indeed, the new commenting system is absolute *****. Digg is run by six baboons and a confused wombat.
- Lasereth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+53Go to your profile at the top of the page, scroll to the CNN story and undigg it. Undigging FTW
- Nothlit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+47I remember when you used to see something like "Digg readers have indicated that this story may be inaccurate" at the top of the page in big red letters if enough people buried it for that reason. I haven't seen that in a long time...did they remove it, or are people just not burying stories anymore?
- mongrel, on 10/10/2007, -2/+40Bring back open comments!!! It's no fun to post anymore when it's likely 98% of readers won't see it!
- Jones82, on 10/10/2007, -1/+39That's ridiculous. The wombat quit several months ago
- inactive, on 11/01/2007, -6/+40no *****...my ***** cat could have mspainted that "screenshot"
- Undiculous, on 11/01/2007, -3/+30"Maybe the list of users that bury/digg a specific comment should be visible too..."
***** that! I deserve the right to anonymously remain a voice of reason and sensibility out of the darkness, unknown to all, expressing my strong, correct, and often belligerent views to the masses, regardless of their background, intelligence, or level of interest. No thanks, jackass, but I'd rather remain anonymous.
-Steven Johnson
(720)285-9157 - chris9902, on 11/01/2007, -3/+29I will inform the Internet Admin to delete it.
- omarciddo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+24Breathe. It's gonna be ok.
- kaeves, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17So I decided to check the recently crated Digg Comment Statistics for user detales who posts these false stories... Can anybody guess what I found?
Diggers hate him. A lot. He has never had a positive rating on a comment he made.
One classic example is this one: "Well, if you don't believe this story then perhaps you'll believe THIS ONE!!!!!! http://beginnorth.com/blog/?p=64 ... OR THIS ONE! http://beginnorth.com/blog/?p=54 OR MAYBE EVEN THIS ONE!!! http://beginnorth.com/blog/?p=18 Still don't believe me? Damn..."
The gig is up, detales.
http://www.neaveru.com/digg/index.html - Jones82, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16That would be an awkward career day
- NinjaBoy, on 11/01/2007, -1/+16I've seen several stories that everyone was commenting that it was fake and that they were marking it as inaccurate yet the story never seemed to gets marked as such on the front page. I think digg might want to tweak the algorithm a little bit.
- orangebluedevil, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15you sent goatse to your mom? woah dude
- HeatVision, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15How about everyone that's digging this article go and digg down the original as inaccurate?
- robwilkens, on 11/01/2007, -7/+21When digg users digg that if you spend $1.04 Canadian you get $1 US means that Canadian money is obviously worth more, there is really no credibility to be found. People here are moronic. Don't get me wrong, I realize the 'generation' of users here grew up with computers and calculators very handy, and didn't have to learn real math, but i'm embarassed to be spending time on the same 'interwebs' as they are.
- NinjaBoy, on 11/01/2007, -10/+24With people who consider wikipedia to be 100% the truth.
- Xerokai, on 10/10/2007, -10/+22I totally agree. Most of these hoax stories are getting too much attention because at most we can flag them as "inaccurate".
- vbsurfer, on 10/10/2007, -7/+17Uh. Most of the stories making it on the front page are either ***** or non-creditable. Yet people still digg it and comment like a bunch of morons who complain how ***** the US government yet...
***** retarded. - anyquestions, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14that's *****. this is not an "art experiment." he is deliberately submitting FAKE news stories with the intention of generating ad revenue. same with the made-up "Hillary Clinton walked out on SiCKO" story, which was submitted by the same user. if it isn't obvious to you that this is meant to drive in more hits and ad revenue then you're an absolute ***** moron.
- omarciddo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10I saw one yesterday, but it was the first in a good few months for me.
- cjswerve, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Check out meatspin.com for a full explanation of goatse. Have a nice day!
- NinjaBoy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9I think it works based on percentages. So after it gets front paged so many people digg the story without reading it or to read it later and it become next to impossible to get marked.
- timbo83251, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13i wish it was true...
what if you found out your dad was goatse man?? - harksaw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Now, I bury that stuff as Inaccurate. And I'm hoping a lot of people in this thread do, too. So why is it that that crap can still get to #1 ?
Maybe we need to reduce the number of buries needed before the footnote "This has been reported as inaccurate" appears next to the article. - UtahApocalyse, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12Ummm That should work just fine.
- sarge96, on 11/01/2007, -0/+8No, I like to be anonymous when I digg you down
- dezertrat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8yep.. i just buried it and its still getting more diggs :(
- Scyth3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Welcome to the internet. I'll be the first of many to laugh at you.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8this site is going straight down the *****.
- robbh66, on 11/01/2007, -0/+6How again would those other options help? If one was more powerful than another people would just use that instead of buried as inaccurate.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6"a man distending his anal lining with his two hands while providing a very clear image of his erect penis"
- iDiggIt42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7It's still there every once and awhile.
- NinjaBoy, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9I don't really understand why everyone hates it so much. Does that one little line really piss you guys off that bad?
- bluenullity, on 11/01/2007, -0/+4BURY on HOAX would just make it easier for the many types of Bury Brigades to do their thing... bury.
Then again maybe thats a good thing with all the crazy conspiracy nuts and their submissions. - newsheatdotcom, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Comment abuse was more pleasing on the eye. At least you could just scroll down to the second post. This new system has so many nested levels and so much blue on the screen it hurts my eyes. Maybe if they got rid of the box that surrounds replies and the big blue "Hide X replies" bar.
- shealer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Nah, the real shock value would be in Episode 5 when he said that. After all, not much of a shock in Episode 6 when we knew 3 years earlier;
- cjswerve, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Star Wars and goatse in the same set of comments, this is a weird world.
- cam2009, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4There is still comment abuse, now it's just in reverse. People are making new comments and putting @username instead of replying so they don't get buried. They should use comment system in the Podcast section (http://digg.com/podcasts/Diggnation/534675), that's the best of both worlds and I have no idea why they haven't switched to it. I used to enjoy scrolling down the page and reading comments, now it's just a messy chore. I know they're trying to help, but it ended up not helping anything and creating more problems. They already have a solution in the Podcast section, they need to step up and fix this.
- thedev, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That was no hoax. CNN hotlinked an image on www.tribalwar.com during the immediate aftermath of 911. After repeated requests by Rayn the site admin to remove the hotlink, he replaced the original image with goatse. I forget how many unique hits CNN generated on that, but it was in the hundreds of thousands
- Nin10dude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2How is something being inaccurate any different from being fake, or a hoax?
- AeroSquid, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5the new comments suck ass. old digg ftw new digg fail.
- rotielover, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2We could simply add this guy to our collective ignore lists -- done and done.
- ChromaVita, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3So who's gonna call it?
- notebuk91, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2This is really one of the best examples of how "easy" a hoax can be.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is