What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee’s singing debut.
270 Comments
- CornStarch, on 10/12/2007, -7/+124Is it just me or do this guy's ideas all lead to the the death of any unpopular opinion?
I often comment on the Wii's failings and often get dugg down for it, should the accumulation of such comments on a video game system result in a "Temporary automatic ban" like this genius advocates? - bergur1, on 10/12/2007, -9/+116The whole problem with comment karma and comment score is that it has the ability to be abused. Say you wanted to bury an Apple fanatic and let him be silence for awhile. You could just grab all the miscrosoft fanboys and bury each and every one of his comments.
- ArmyOfFun, on 10/12/2007, -7/+100I'm wary of punishing people for having negative rated comments.
There are two types of comments which get rated negatively all the time even though they probably shouldn't. The first are comments which, despite being well stated, cogent, and intelligent are against popular opinion. The second are comments which are intended to be humorous or sarcastic. In those cases, I don't think punishing the commenter is fair. It'll result in even more dry group-think type discussions and I'm not sure they'll be anymore civilized. - rcran, on 10/12/2007, -13/+71The one I am most for is the total comment score.
Easy to implement, very useful. - Jaq524, on 10/12/2007, -5/+59It also has a lot to do with how popular a story is. For example, if I were to say "cool story" as the first comment on a MAJOR story ( >10,000 diggs) I might get a score of about -800. Do I deserve to be temporarily banned for this?
- Ajajadude, on 10/12/2007, -10/+60Which is why I don't put a cap on the number of dugg downs that will show. If that made any freaking sense...
Digging down and digging up of comments is such a crock most of the time due to the immature nature of many people here. Either it's people trolling and just digging down each and every comment they see or it's someone who just doesn't like what you're saying (despite making a coherent and semi-logical argument which happens to not jive with the fanboys), it's just stupid.
I have no idea how to fix this aspect of commenting, but maybe some sort of cumulative commenting karma could be developed. Who knows. - CornStarch, on 10/12/2007, -7/+53What if I regularly said things in support of religion? It's a valid view but one that often is digg down below negative 20 on digg. Should that constitute a "Temporary automatic ban".
- AhrenBa, on 10/12/2007, -10/+51The only real thing that bugs me about the comment section on Digg, is that it takes forever to load once the comment number rises. :(
- borninda818, on 10/12/2007, -11/+46The funny part is that so many people open up those greyed comments just to digg them down again...If you don't like stupid comment...dont read them.
- TriZz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+39I agree with this so much. That's why I usually go to Slashdot if I want intelligent and well-written comments. I think there's a major difference of experience and maturity there than here on digg, although I like the content more here.
I haven't seen a good discussion on digg in a long time. If it's a religious discussion, the Christian gets dugg down. If it's a political discussion, the republican gets dugg down. Usually comments that get dugg well are "but will it blend?" and "IM n YoR _____________ FukkIN WIT YOr _____________" - laplacian, on 10/12/2007, -9/+39Karma is a good idea (not new) . . . the rest are kind of pointless imo. from TFA:
"1. Keep a running total comment score of someone’s total negative/positive
2. Top 100 positive commenters list.
3. Display someone’s comment score
4. Comment karma
5. Temporary automatic bans from commenting" - engtech, on 10/12/2007, -22/+49This is so going to get buried.
- rm999, on 10/12/2007, -10/+34Each person should have a limit to the number of negative (and perhaps positive) ratings they can give out. Too many people abuse the thumbs down button. It is not uncommon for every comment, including the truly insightful ones, to start out at -2 or -3 because a few jerks go and rank *every* comment in a thread down.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29"also. fix the bug so you can mulit digg up a comment up to +4 if u click your mouse real fast"
just an fyi, that's been fixed for a long time, although it will show it going up several times, if you refresh you'll notice it hasn't - anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -10/+29"David Pogue of NYTimes says “discussions devolve into name-calling and bickering”"
You know, some of us have some maturity and would never devolve into such things, you big arsewipe cocksucking bastard. - ericsemail, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23The problem that I see with the solutions mentioned is that people tend to digg down comments because they don't agree with them--not because what was said was obscene, rude, or any of the other negative adjectives. In other words, people will have negative "digg-Karma" if they are Republicans simply because many diggers lean left. In my eyes, these solutions would polarize digg even more so--not unite the reader base to engage in active debate. Just my .02 cents... What do you think?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21CTRL+F
- captinherb, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22None of these ideas are going to work very well. Having a top 100 commenter list isn't well conceived. The highest rated comments are for well placed burns, not for insightful commentary. Not to mention we already have too big of a problem with people replying to the top comment just to get there comment read by more people. The temporary bans and the rest aren't going to work because most of the really bad comments are made by accounts started that day, throw away accounts.
Digg already has a system that works, if you don't want to see those comments then set your comment threshold at 0 or +5. - UNL1M1T3D, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22I usually click on the grayed out comments just to see what the person had said. They might have had something valid to say, but got buried by some fanboy. If it was inappropriate what they posted I will digg them down though.
- Yurimanna, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24Protecting comments that are unwanted is the most important part of free speech.
Deny that (by banning/suspending users who hit a certain negative total) and you deny all of the good that Digg can be. - anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21Viagra wants you to be!
- shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Wait screw discussing this LOOK ITS A WORDPRESS SITE THATS UP!
- macaca, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Only way Digg can be better if Digger is not allowed to dig his/her friends more then once per day. There is lot of group ism and favoritism going on for cronies. I know I am going to get buried. You know why? because I don't have any friends on my Digg list.
- Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18Sad to say, but Slashdot has it right as far as comment systems go. I like Digg's "everyone constantly moderates" deal over the /. "we'll give you some mod points if we feel like it, but you can't mod anything in a story you've commented on," but everything else /. does is on the mark.
What I really hate about Digg is the single-nested replies, simple up|down against comments without a reason (unfunny, troll, redundant, and their opposites). - danielrh9, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19A lot of these ideas, while well intended, flatly would not work.
As has been mentioned, comments are routinely buried simply because they don't follow the norm. Negative comments about companies such as Nintendo or Apple within stories about them are more than likely to be buried, even sometimes if the point is well reasoned. It's just going to happen. Unpopular opinions don't necessarily equate to abuse. Additionally, a "comment score" or "comment karma" feature would be overly problematic as well. Users who routinely post harassing, irrelevant, or offensive comments could also make sure to post witty jokes guaranteed to attain positive comment diggs. As long as they consistently posted humorous comments guaranteed to win over positive diggs, they could still post abusing comments and retain a mostly average "score" in this system. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13"and make negative comments have a negative impact on user accounts."
just the other day i ASKED A QUESTION that was hardly common knowledge (was about some obscure car slang) and was down -35 last i checked.
it seems if your comment isn't a ***** joke or a lame meme, you're dugg down, which i think is totally *****. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Agreed. Something like this would be the death of free speech on Digg. It would be far too easy for a group to banish anyone that disagreed with them. Meaningful political conversations here would come to an end. Can you imagine the battle between the Apple fanboys and the Windows fanboys? There would be blood on the keyboards. This is a really bad idea.
- lensman00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@Trizz
> If it's a religious discussion, the Christian gets dugg down. If it's a political discussion, the republican gets dugg down.
It depends on the story, and on the originating source. For instance, this comment in a discussion about the UN currently has 29 diggs up:
"by jackman0654
This man spoke the truth to the corrupt Chairman of the corrupt Human Rights Council Of the Corrupt UN. I would welcome the League Of nations back in comparison to the UN which is nothing but a slop jar for the Terrorist and the death cult known as Is-lame."
Christian? After his fashion. Republican? Most likely. But lots of diggs up because the story was critical of the UN and the source was Little Green Footballs. Put that comment on some other story and it might get just as many diggs down. So the ecology isn't simply reducible to "Digg is full of lefty atheist potheads", or what have you. - ThreeDee912, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16@resplence
I don't need to login every time I do something on Digg. Maybe your browser's cookie/privacy settings are set incorrectly?
(This is one of those helpful comments some people dig down) - xpose, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Ive got an idea. How about digg actually makes threaded comments and gets rid of show/hide. ITS TERRIBLE.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Comment karma and banning are terrible ideas. I thought people believed in free speech around here. An unpopular comment is not necessarily bad, just unpopular. Democracy has shown that what's popular is not the same as what is moral or ethical, so I wouldn't use it as a gauge for censoring people's comments. If a particular comment is bad, it will get dugg down and you can skip it if you trust the voting system. That's the whole point of the system. Why mess with it? Slashdot's system is really bad because you can't even vote unless you are deemed worthy by the powers that be. This leads to a system where dissenting opinions are destroyed, and those who dissent never get any voting power to fight the majority opinion.
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Interesting ideas... I hope they do something soon because the current system really gives us no reason to post good comments. The digg crew needs to sit down and look at the Slashdot moderation system and apply some of the good ideas. If they want a quick fix, nested replies and post quoting would help.
- rayishu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Number 6. IP Bann anicejew
- cevil203, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7the best way to fix comments, is to restrict the number of diggs/buries so that people cant waste them. some people bury comments for no reason, and sometimes its like a targeting system. people just go after comments to bury them...lame.. at least if there was a limit on how many you could do, people would think twice before being jerks about opinions
- Endemoniada, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Commenting on Slashdot works. Commenting on Digg doesn't.
The solution isn't elaborate algorithms for banning abusers, it's creating a system where comments are rated and the ratings reviewed by at least one other, impartial user. As it is now, you can digg someone down with absolutely no consequence what so ever. If my thumbs-down would be reviewed by someone else, they would (hopefully) see that I was being selfish and dugg the comment down only because I didn't agree.
And as someone else mentioned: Digg has a way of letting people discuss things with their thumbs instead of words. Disagree with something? Digg down. Don't even bother explaining WHY you disagree, just digg down. Anonymous and absolutely consequence free. Imagine that in real life: Don't agree with something? Knock that sucker out cold, no consequence.
I'm not 100% sure if commenting on Slashdot works so much better because it attracts a more mature crowd, of if their system is more stable, but the fact is that their system IS better. - JJJJust, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8It would also be great if the comments were somehow... paginated. It's hard going back to really good story and finding a long page with 300+ comments ready to suck the life out of your computer.
- toconnor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Ironically the comments on this article are better than the article itself.
- Firemeboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Digg needs to display not the 'total' number of diggs, but how many positive, and how many negative. If a comment has -4 diggs, I don't know if 4 people have found it worthless, or if 2004 found it worthless, and 2000 found it helpful. If I knew a comment had been helpful by 2000 people, you can bet I'd click on it.
Please show me both numbers. - CornStarch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@rm999
They actually do suspend your account for rating down too many people in one thread. It happened to me when I rated down almost every person who who added nothing to the comment section but a quote from the threads article: "Simpson Quotes"
It was probably ill advised of me too rate down so many people, although I stand by my opinion that they all deserved it, regardless my account was suspended until I explained why I did it to digg and they reinstated it after I promised not to go to an extreme like that again. - bigdoug, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11I enjoy the nut-case comments to. Who wants to be stiff all the time?
- Wytefang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The problem with heavier penalties for negative Diggers is that frequently people get Dugg down for simply sharing an opinion that may be contrary to the majority of the crowd's opinion on a specific article. It may not be that they were a jerk, or an @$$hat or whatever, just that their opinion wasn't as mainstream as other opinions. The Digg system would have no way to differentiate between negative Diggs for crappy behavior and pointless negative Diggs due to some bozo not agreeing with your viewpoint.
Most of those suggestions were pretty darn good, imho. - I_am_so_smrt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5So what if people leave a bunch of ***** comments on a story about a child and her parents who struggled for 10 years on an income of $3 a week while the Grandmother was out prostituting to make ends meet, it just goes to show how ignorant people can be. And who the ***** cares if a comment gets dug down? PC's suck -70 diggs, Mac's suck -94 diggs, You suck -800 diggs, I suck better than you +578 diggs... The Idea of this site is to let every one bash or praise stories that pertain to life, the universe and everything. I'm sure I'll get dugg down. Don't bother my ass none.
- Dayyve, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@all internet users!
Turn the other cheek. Whenever I read a comment that starts off with something pretty nasty I skip on to the next one. The problem is a fundamental one and can be fixed in only one step- Make better people! Seriously...people suck. There are comments in digg that are no worse or better than the prose that was scrawled in the public bathrooms at the park near where I grew up. No difference really. Don't look at the badly drawn (or ASCII'd) penis if it offends you! - NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7There's no question about it - the digg comment system is broken, and has been broken for a long time.
Of all of the updates that digg has gone through since I've been a member, for close to a year now, the one feature that has remained the most unchanged is the comment system. This leads me to one of two conclusions. Either:
-The digg staff doesn't consider the digg comment system to be a terribly vital part of the social news experience, or
-The digg staff is clueless on how to fix the issues that plague the system.
The truth of the matter is, something needs to be done. This particular list of suggestions will probably solve nothing. Part of digg's design philosophy seems to be coming up with new ways to do old things. This might deter them from going towards a more familiar, established model (i.e. Slashdot) that works well. Unfortunately, they seem to have ignored the fact that this comment system is only slightly better than what YouTube offers, which has long been a whipping post for criticism of its comment system. It's basic, and hardly fits the needs of a site with the user population and participation on the level of digg. I don't have any suggestions; I'm not a designer or innovator. But it's clear to me that this comment system is not workable, and changes need to be made. - byronm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7The problem with digg is fanboys use it to push an agenda, not seek feedback or public opinion. If Digg does as you suggest this is nothing more than another slashdot with a different face as those with the highest karma (and most time to waste) would be in control merely out of visibility alone.
- ekrabs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I agree with you. I've been dugg down before, not because I've had anything bad to say, but just that people basically disagreed with me. Nothing wrong with disagreements, but I wish people would find a better reason to digg me down than that.
Ah, but that's the trouble with direct democracy eh? Majority rule is perfectly fine so long the majority is reasonable and sane. But if they're not.... - anoriega, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Here's how: make the system exactly like Slashdot's.
- carpespasm, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8if you're stiff for more than 4 hours it causes problems.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 276 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