What is Digg?445 Comments
- elebrio, on 11/01/2007, -70/+339Do you really think the number of Ron Paul stories lately is NATURAL?
- ACrazyGerman, on 11/01/2007, -103/+320My question is. Who the ***** is Ron Paul?
- MSF2, on 10/11/2007, -45/+260"There are no mention of the Obama spammers, or the Gore spammers anywhere...."
Are you kidding me? I just did search for Obama and the first three results were all about Ron Paul. - SultanTravi, on 10/11/2007, -26/+175Look, if people are using multiple accounts to digg stuff up then yes, that's artificial. But I know I have my one account and I digg a fair number, not all, but the ones I like, of the articles about Ron Paul. I think that this is the case--if a lot of people join because they support him and want him seen, and that's perfectly fine.
HOWEVER
I'm sick of general and generic Ron Paul stuff. If it's something groundbreaking or interesting (like his stuff on 9/11 and Giuliani) that's worth a Digg. If it's just another link to a random article about him, then no, that's lame. - rm999, on 11/01/2007, -50/+156Hey BigDave, you're famous!
http://ronpaulreport.squarespace.com/the-ron-paul-report/2007/4/16/41607-ron-paul-daily-digg.html
"Also you'll notice someone named BigDaveDiode all over Ron Pauls posts (on digg) trying to spread lies about him. Please digg down his comments. Thank you!"
These sites need to be banned from digg - encouraging people to digg down comments without reading them is a clear violation of the spirit of the site. - canewediggit, on 11/01/2007, -54/+160johnson- go count up the submission by the 'obama and gore spammers' and then go go count up the ron paul ones. i will bet you my vote in the '08 election, right here, right now, that combined, obama + gore < paul. furthermore, show some proof of gaming efforts akin to what elebrio has provided for those paul sites, or shut the hell up.
nobody is denying libertarians or paul any right to the 'debate' here on digg. i happen to think paul has some very valid things to say that need to be heard. but we're sick of the spam and the gaming. - hbweb500, on 11/01/2007, -65/+166My fear is that many diggers jumped on the bandwagon, thinking that Ron Paul was the "popular alternative."
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -11/+96Look, there's nothing wrong with simply providing a link to one digg submission and saying "please digg this" to your blog's audience. That's exactly what happens on every site that uses a "Digg This" button, especially the ones with digg counter.
What I have a problem with is sites that say "find every Ron Paul story" and digg it up, or find every "BigDaveDiode" post and digg it down. That has no place on a site like this. I'm all for banning sites that violate the TOS to that degree. And I even like Ron Paul, minus a few reservations. I'm just tired of the spam.
As for C&L and Thinkprogress, I don't think people automatically digg those, and I'll be the first to mark one as a dupe if the a story has made the front page. The posts are usually interesting and definitely about things that I don't often see elsewhere, especially the clips of politicos speaking. And I still don't understand how anyone can bury a video clip as _inaccurate_. I mean, come on. But yet there are always one or two comments that show people are burying these without even looking. - elebrio, on 10/11/2007, -33/+107I realize arguments against a few of the sites listed appears a little weak. There is definitely a trend though.
- goddimus, on 10/11/2007, -32/+97Glad I am not the only one noticing an annoying effort to force one particular candidate down our throats. I have no opinion for or against Ron Paul but I don't look at the political section at all now because I got tired of hearing about him
- thenativeraver, on 10/11/2007, -14/+61You forgot LGF.
"to submit stories or comments linking to affiliate programs, multi-level marketing schemes, sites/blogs repurposing existing stories (source hops), or off-topic content;" - saikhan, on 10/11/2007, -10/+51Yes yes, but they are the only blog with an organised, closed-registration userbase that insults existing digg members and wishes to establish a 'beachhead' here on digg.
"You may have noticed the sudden appearance of links beneath each post, labeled “digg this” and “del.icio.us”. These are quick links to let users of “social bookmarking” sites Digg.com or del.icio.us submit an LGF post for publication. Both of these sites tilt pretty heavily toward the moonbat side of the current political scene, so I thought it might be a good idea to attempt to establish a lizardoid beachhead there.
Nobody said it was going to be easy."
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21608_LGF_Infrastructure_Update - inactive, on 11/01/2007, -51/+91Regarding the ethics of these Libertarian/Ron Paul spammers:
"we could be able to tighten things up a great deal if we figure out which articles go over the best on digg... and also what times of day so we can optimize # of diggs coming in in a short period of time."
http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=4uc9g7c3u22troms64b2r1g9d6&topic=11332.0
They've also decided to focus on fixing the podcasts to pump their agenda:
"Ian and Mark really need to push for more diggs for the podcast. Digg is read by WAY more people than podcast alley ever will be. Come on guys, if we can get at least 1,000 diggs we can get on the front podcast page and we seem to be able to do it on podcastalley often enough." - msaleem, on 11/01/2007, -24/+61I have been marking a lot of that crap as lame as of late. You can tell that these are organized efforts and promoted with multiple sock-puppet accounts. Thanks for writing/submitting this post.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -54/+86I hated the spam, did some research, now I can't stand him.
He's pretty much against everything reasonable, he's against net neutrality, a woman's right to choose, stem cell research and all his supporters ever say is that "oh, he's voting against the funding not the item itself" like there's any difference to the Internet, a woman, or a parapalegic. Then, of course, is his racism. He still refuses to release all of his racist, survivalist newsletters, some of which leaked out onto the web -- and then he has the balls to complain that the government isn't "open." - elebrio, on 10/11/2007, -20/+51Or more accurately, Digg up if you're tired of Ron Paul supporters abusing Digg. But if I had entitled it that, guess what? The Ron Paul Spam machine would have buried this story already. But don't worry, you will bury it soon I'm sure.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -47/+77>"we could be able to tighten things up a great deal if we figure out which articles go over the best on digg... and also what times of day so we can optimize # of diggs coming in in a short period of time."
http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=4uc9g7c3u22troms64b2r1g9d6&topic=11332.0
By the way, could someone mirror this website? The last time I caught them with their pants down, they dumped all their posts to hide what they were doing. If someone could store all of this, then it would be handy the next time one of them claims that there's no evidence (after they destroyed the evidence.) Thanks in advance... - pictureDIGGER, on 10/11/2007, -18/+44I disabled the politics section for this sole reason. I can say for a fact that I won't be influenced by this "digg campaign".
- canewediggit, on 10/11/2007, -8/+32if we're going to really call out 'source hops' (and i think we should) then we can just write-up just about every blog out there. doesn't matter if it's political (malkin) or tech (engadget) or personal (most blogs). all the crap that comes in w/ little content other than a link to the actual story should be buried.
bury brigade ftw! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+30Why stop at political sites? Why not include ALL the sites that do it? Consumerist is at the top of the list.
- MSF2, on 11/12/2007, -22/+46Because the paulspammers are the worst. For weeks after the Republican debates almost all the top upcoming stories were about Ron Paul, and almost all of them said the same thing. That is spam.
- PATSCRU, on 10/11/2007, -30/+53RE: ryanunderdown, elebrio, bigdave and the rest.
These guys are trying to save digg as we know it. This place has turned into a spam orgy, and it's not the same digg as when i first joined. Average diggers are being influenced by the influx of spam, and people like bigdave are some of the few willing to speak up to try and stop it.
Go Bigdave and crew.
it's nice to know there's still a hint of sanity here.
BURY RONPAULSPAM. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -22/+45No, Digg up if you dislike what Ron Paul's pathetic supporters are doing.
- graviplana, on 10/11/2007, -16/+38Wow, the Anti-Ron Paul Force arrives at Digg.
- DrOBoogie, on 10/11/2007, -8/+30I'm a Ron Paul supporter/libertarian, and while I usually enjoy the Ron Paul articles that hit the front page, I'm just worried it might annoy some and hurt the cause ultimately, in that some people would get so annoyed at the saturation of articles that they would ignore the actual article itself. I mean, I know I got slightly annoyed when all of the O'Bama articles were hitting the front page. I don't think it's against the ToS, but I can see why it might be annoying. I'm all for getting Ron Paul some more exposure, but maybe not as many as there are now.
That said, this list is a little biased. I've been noticing a preponderance of crooksandliars.com articles of late, among other things... - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -30/+51B3bomber:
>@bigdavediode: Sources?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.african.american/msg/c8668bd3662b0fa5
He still refuses to release the newsletters, by the way. - LakeshoreBaby, on 11/01/2007, -22/+42Most of those sites are Ron Paul related sites. I think what Digg means in their TOS is just don't cheat the Digging process. Organizing people to Digg doesn't do that. Opening multiple accounts per user or forcing people to do what they don't want to do is not cool. But if you have a bunch of people who support something, and then you have other people trying to organize a vote or Digg, then I don't see anything wrong with this. It's getting people into the process. As long as each person gets one Digg, there is nothing bad going on. And how are they supposed to Digg something they support if they aren't alerted to the process. This is just a story to censor Ron Paul. And besides, with Ron Paul being censored by the MSM, Digg should be proud that they are a part of getting real truth out there.
- explnx, on 04/27/2009, -22/+42I like Ron. I really really do. But this spam is getting very annoying. While in the past I was seeing things from his perspective (not hard as I've always had libertarian views), now whenever I hear about Ron Paul all I can think of is all the non-news news stories on digg. We don't get a front page article every time Obama, Romney, etc. are mentioned on a TV station. These stories simply are not interesting, and are bound to lose the guy more votes than he wins.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -14/+33Duggtrends makes it easy to tell which sites are gaming the system.
Most legitimate front page stories build their initial diggs slowly. After about a half hour, they will have 4-5 Diggs. It will continue at that pace for another hour or so.Once it hits the front page, the diggs increase dramatically.
But when sites are gaming, it will get 20 o more Diggs within 5-10 minutes of being submitted.
Roughlydrafted was the most obvious culprit of this. Every one of their submissions was getting 30+ diggs in 10 minutes. No matter WHEN it was submitted, even middle of the night.
The same thing is happening with sites like Consumerist, or many of the Ron Paul sites. Duggtrends shows that they get a ridiculous amount of Diggs almost immediately after they are submitted. Far too quickly for it to just be people who saw the DIGG THIS button on the site. Unless these sites have people constantly hitting REFRESH on those sites and who literally do nothing else all day but sit in front of their computer checking to see if any new stories were submitted. - DrOBoogie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+20I'm just saying, don't digg articles that state things we all know, like his voting record, or who he even is. Digg when he does or says something especially important; something newsworthy. Otherwise it's redundant.
- UtahApocalyse, on 10/11/2007, -5/+22I just posted the following to a RP message board... I hope that this may help. We dont want to loose the support we have gotten from the digg community:
Everyone needs to read this article on digg. Also they should read the comments. I do understand somewhat there point. digg has been a good place to be able and get out information, since the MSM wont. However, due to how many posts, and diggs articles are getting we are wearing out our welcome. I think we have hit a critical mass where we will start losing support from people that read digg rather then gaining and getting the word out. I know that Ron Paul articles are not all coming from any one site so we cant really stop them from being posted. What we can do though is use digg as it is truly intended. Bury articles that do not have quality information. bury articles that are just dupes of other articles. Dont just blindly digg articles if you haven't read them. and most important DO NOT USE MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS. definitely still digg articles that are new and have important facts. take part in discussion and education people on Ron Paul's stance on the issues. Lets be respectful of the digg community and not turn them against us. - AlphaEta, on 10/11/2007, -8/+25I don't mind if Ron Paul inspires people to join digg, provided that they then become a regular member and contribute something meaningful to the site.
If they are just going to make a bunch of sock puppet accounts or ONLY digg Paul stories with the intent of hijacking the site to get their message across, then I say they're a bunch of ***** and I hope they leave and never darken our doorstep again.
I know some people don't see a problem with this behavior, but what happens when the next flavor of the month rolls along? Will a whole new group of people make digg accounts for the sole purpose of using our site to propagandize their cause?
I realize that a lot of digg regulars are interested in Paul and want to support him. They submit and digg non-Paul stories as well and are active members of the community. I have absolutely no problem with these people, and I would never accuse them of spamming! In fact, while I don't plan to vote for him because I don't share the libertarian philosophy, I appreciate a lot of Paul's political views and have dugg a few of his stories. - rat2, on 10/11/2007, -11/+28Ron Paul ROCKS.. I think its natural
- aburd, on 10/11/2007, -12/+28This isn't a call to silence Ron Paul or his supporters. It is a call to have a little less of this one subject on Digg. You all have done a great job of getting his message out there, but you have to be aware of the potential for a backlash. Try a Ron Paul story every 3 days rather than 3-4 a day. It will make people appreciate his message more.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -16/+32You know, it strikes me that it would be funny to put out a honey pot -- a story titled "Ron Paul Kicking Ass" with a typical enough description and "(this is a honey pot, don't digg this or you will be banned)" on the webpage pointed to by the URL.
Anyone who still diggs that without reading the web page should be banned, or at least made fun of. - teethman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19I trust that the digg system deletes real spam. It seems like someone is just pissed that a subject they dont like is getting dugg.
- inactive, on 11/01/2007, -49/+64rm999:
>Hey BigDave, you're famous!
Thanks! (Blush) I suddenly feel like a superhero! (I actually started complaining and writing about these guys a half year or more ago.) As for the lies, all I have is the actual sources that Ron Paul refuses to release of his survivalist newsletter.
If I ever start some meaningless empty blog, I command you all to visit it. :) - mal1964, on 10/11/2007, -19/+34Ron Paul is spamming for 2012, diggers will be able to vote by then
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -7/+22The reason nobody else brings their favorite candidate's records and information about what they believe in, is that they're ashamed of it. Doublespeak Giuliani, the gun controller whose quote is "Freedom means obedience to Authority" to the whole HOST of loser ***** kneepad knights, "fighting for the people" in washington:
they're all a bunch of bought, paid for, kneepad whores. Nothing more, Nothing ***** less.
Hillary Clinton with her "get em into indoctrination (preschool) by FOUR years old....
They're all bought, paid for, bent-over-tables being pounded from behind, while gobbling that cash jizz up front, WHORES.
That's why they don't bring their candidates' records. WHORES. Everybody knows it. They KNOW everybody knows it, and the times they've tried to present that ***** here, where they can't take over the t.v. channel or the 30 seconds of ad time with NO TIME FOR ANYBODY TO CHECK UP, it got sent where it belonged: back to the whore-houses in washington it came from.
I might not think Ron Paul's the greatest, this & that, but i KNOW all those other ***** losers are nothing but open gullets for the streams of cash that get injected down their hot, moaning throats.
***** them. They've been bought a LONG time ago. They're ***** whores.
Nobody respects a whore.
Nobody. - mookiemookie, on 10/11/2007, -14/+29I'm all for third party and independant candidates, and I love the idea of more choice in politics. That being said, I'm sick of visiting digg and seeing stories like "BREAKING: OMG RON PAUL ATE LUNCH!"
At this point I'm so burned out on Ron Paul that I wouldn't care if he was the second coming of Jesus Christ himself, I don't want to hear about it. - spyd3rweb, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19its a good thing ron paul isnt a liberal.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -8/+22Yeah, who wants to hear about presidential candidates? Give us more cat dancing on keyboard!
/sarcasm - BlindWebster, on 10/11/2007, -14/+28And the reason more stories about Obama and Gore aren't Dugg because the astute Diggs crowd can spot Oligarchs a mile away.
- gldfshnpcklejar, on 10/11/2007, -14/+28I'm glad I base presidential candidates off of what they say and not based off whether they appear on the front page of Digg or not. Of all the Republican candidates I like Ron Paul the best. I only have dugg only one or two of his articles though, I don't like to digg stuff. Trolling and burying are much more enjoyable.
I'm voting for Harvey Dent anyway ;-) - BlindWebster, on 10/11/2007, -9/+22Does it occur to anyone that the reason Ron Paul is so popular on the internet is because he has the best technology voting record... http://news.com.com/2009-1040-6131719.html
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+20@undersky, well done.
If anyone missed it, Undersky made a quick honey pot experiment above. The story description was basic pro-Paul exclamation. The web page at the URL clearly says not to digg this article (or you will be banned! ;)
Twenty-two people dugg it already -- obviously not even clicking the URL -- perhaps by the title alone. THAT is what spam is all about -- an attempt to get anything and everything from one site or topic to the front page by any means possible.
I'd love for those people to find the best Ron Paul stories and digg those up. Digging everything blindly just gets the rest of us annoyed and does no good, not even for Ron Paul. - ABEND954, on 10/11/2007, -18/+31I didn't even know who Ron Paul was until I saw some articles about him on Digg. After reading about him I became a fan and I have dugg a lot of the articles that I read here.
I don't see anything wrong with organizing people to support a candidate and digg up articles about him. To me, that's democracy. If there are single people using multiple Digg accounts or paying people to digg Paul stories then I would agree that they are violating Digg's TOS. But just telling people to join Digg and and digg up RP stories, that's not gaming the system... that's called good marketing. - elebrio, on 10/11/2007, -14/+27@catalysis If you follow my comments and posts you will see that I am in fact a long-time Republican. I was a Libertarian previously.
- BrandonMills, on 10/11/2007, -10/+23As politically minded as I am, I think the past few weeks have shown me how much I don't want election politics to be a part of Digg. Digg was a tech news site at its core, and now suddenly its a grassroots political site. What would the viewers of Americablog or CrooksandLiars think if suddenly all of their stories were one day nothing but tech stories?
- BrandonMills, on 11/01/2007, -10/+23We don't want him to drop out. We want his supporters to stop spamming Digg.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 439 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is