What is Digg?45 Comments
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21You're wrong.
I only care about "MY" blog.
;) - Nocturnal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8AdSense + niche = $
- a7bat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I could care less for blogs, but if they got original content no one else is providing then I'll be checking them out.
I also dislike it when something is posted on a blog and linked on digg. Instead it should be directly linked to the source, but oh well. - benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Blog spammers must die + dig for you.
- kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Actually he was being an idiot, no such system exists, it really is run by the users.
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Off topic: But how does a story that averaged about 2 diggs an hour and doesn't have any comments make it to the front page? This had 29 diggs and no comments and it had been online for about 12 hours and 35 minutes. So these weren't 'lightening rapid' diggs (like the kind that are about to start). I'm not saying it doesn't deserve to be here. I just find it a tad peculiar.
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Or how about a section just for blog submissions? Then you can ignore it and it will help keep the rest of the site's content clean from blog spam while simultaneously providing a means for bloggers to gain visibility?
- madeingermany, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@stuckinafridge: maybe f0dder has a blog? ;)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4f0dder you cared enough to comment :-)
- f0dder, on 10/12/2007, -10/+12the only people that care about blogs are other bloggers.
- josegutz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4All I hear is Blog blog blog.....
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2----
- RegisteredUser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Blogging for money isn't a bad thing per se. But it doesn't take long before the blogger decides that quantity is better than quality. Page rank, site traffic, Adsense.. all of that starts to cloud the blogger's thoughts and you start seeing stupid content. Pretty soon, that blog becomes worthless like the rest of the blogs out there.
- kirkio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it didn't really work for Kottke...
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@fufubag (nice)
Apparently not. It wants to replace it with 'loggers', a sure-fire guarantee to take this thread in an unexpected direction. I could be wrong, but I think it used to not recognize the word digg either. - jo42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Blog":
Something left in the toilet bowl after a large meal. - kidhero, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4what's that i hear?
the sound of a bubble deflating - fufubag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2kbarrett,
Because then no one would read the bloggers' section and they would still have to spam the other sections to get people to read their lame diaries.
*is bloggers not a word? Diggspellcheck says it is not. - robwistar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ugh ... mental exercise
- ZephyrWest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wonder what will happen to TechCrunch once the flow of Web 2.0 start-ups slows to a trickle...
- 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1question authority, think for your self!
- soloride, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2f0dder
I think a lot of people read blogs without even knowing what a blog is. Most people don't go past the top 10 results of a search. There is a lot of blogs that rank well in the SERPS (top 10). So if the blogger knows his subject and a non-blogger finds his site and likes what he reads then I would say that he cared about the blog's content. - Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2kbarret: Or, alternatively, aspiring bloggers could post original editorials and articles that are on par with other pages posted to digg, and we could have blog posts that do more than act as proxy's for real sites.
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@quactaur - Aha. Thanks for not being snarky with me. I haven't been a member that long. I didn't realize that Digg had editors on staff that did that sort of thing.
- dgoffinet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How is it that I don't find these cavernously dugg and commented articles until *after* I've posted a duplicate? I search first, I swear I do. Maybe I should turn in my pocket protector and go back to vi.
- Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3It's not just run by the users. How would that explain how some posts get 20 diggs and goto the frontpage in minutes, some get 20 diggs, wait an hour, then get pushed to the frontpage, and some need hundreds of diggs to be promoted?
Yes, there could be a script that has a time-based pattern, but a much simpler explanation (especially considering a lot of the "unfair" elevations are of a similar viewpoint / basis) is that digg has a group of moderators who flag articles to the front page. - kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Does anyone know for sure? As some who occasionally submits articles I would like to know if there is an automatic system based on votes or if it's ultimately the decision of digg staff editors or the combination of both. And if there are editors, who are they? And, more importantly, do they accept "cash donations"? (wink wink)
- dalkor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I help run a blog about voip and asterisk. It takes time and a solid niche to generate a core audience. We are currently focusing on doing more editoral material and enhance the site's usability. It takes time to build your audience but is very fulfilling in the end.
- newcamile, on 06/16/2009, -0/+0Thanks for the information!, check out www.vismomedia.com, and tell me your professional opinion :) looks cool !
- forumreader, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1There are not editors promoting stuff to the front page. How is it so impossible to believe that they have a complex algorithm that checks more than just the number of diggs, comments, and story timespan?
- jimm0228, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My blog rocks. But it isn't making any serious cash.
Redneck
http://freshvideo.blogspot.com
http://you-could-be-a-redneck-if.blogspot.com - mrfunkeye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In the Netherlands a newspaper corp. purchased 40% stake in a weblog, geenstijl.nl, but I doubt any of them bloggers cash such amounts TFA mentions. There is certainly some money to make if you generate unique content.
- diggality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Amazing that one guy’s enthusiasm for tech/web2.0 attracts so many loyal readers.
- warofwrath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Why aren't you blogging? Blogging is a form of mental excercise that can be beneficial to anyone.
- cago, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3You know what also makes money? Gay porn.
- Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Because the system isn't automatic, stories are ultimately promoted to the front page by editors, who are biased. Normally they share the common biases (which are called interests) so no one complains though.
More on topic, what more is this article than explaining that popular blogs with ads make money? - asfaniz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0right,, i got something from my blog. http://hair-loss-hair.blogspot.com
- GerryDaman, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1The Daily Kimchi - My blog teaching English in Seoul - pictures, videos, food
http://thedailykimchi.blogspot.com - Aceanuu, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Well, now, this is a story that I haven't seen anything like on digg before. Interesting.
- talledega500, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Real businesses supported by ads.
You mean like TV. COOL! - TomP, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Because its night time and theres not as many people online :)
- madeingermany, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5There is blogs with actual content out there.
Surely not mine, but I've seen them ;)
For example, always very entertaining, even for non-bloggers, is
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/ - robzepeda, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3This is pretty cool. I started a Chargers blog and recently got hired by AOL Sports to provide blogging content.
This is a perfect example of how the internet has changed the way people live (and do business)
http://www.bolthype.com/ if you are curious
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