What is Digg?58 Comments
- n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -6/+59In all honesty, if you're reading this, you should know how Digg works by now... ;)
- andrethegiant, on 10/12/2007, -2/+52Cool! Now I know how to pronounce digg! Can you believe I've been saying "dig-G" this whole time?
- ionut, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26This article is better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digg - brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20What's the difference between 1.0 and 2.0? Bigger Tubes?
- ksgant, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22They also left off that Digg is a Web 2.0 site, so if you're still using Web 1.0 it won't work.
- seinman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18You don't have very many friends, do you?
- digitaldivider, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16how things work on digg;
1) submit given apple or 'web 2.0' story, even if there's more interesting and better stories to be told insist out spouting garbage on your sleek os and 'new and improved' webpage.
2) watch as discussion begins and everyone that agrees with your point gets comments dugg up to the f'in sky, and everyone whose opinion dissents from theirs gets dugg down into oblivion.
3) rinse, repeat
4) err.. profit.
do these four things and the digg community will love you. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9What is Digg?
The Basics
`Fanboys of Nintendo, Linux, Liberal Leftists, and AJAX
`They hate Apple, Bush, and anything non-tech
`iPod Killer is often used though never meant
`None of them can afford a PS3
`The Wii is like a Godsend and often noted for it's low price
`Users Digg whatever they see and complain if someone else submitted it
`Virgins - Bigbro69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9There's a real world?
- MyLittlePony, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Quick, somebody post a cheatsheet for YouTube!
- Batiu-Drami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I *think* it actually depends on a views-to-diggs ratio, for example a page getting a digg from almost everyone who views it will get promoted much more quickly than a story which gets dugg every 20th page view.
- treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Oh yeah.. I've done a heap of work on those wikipedia articles over the past year. Great resource.
Someone needs to create Keith his own Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keith_Harrison&action=edit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diggnation - LordSkywalker, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Just tell them to check out digg.com. Tell them if they want to know more, check 'digg' on Wikipedia.
- Thorpe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8From the cheatsheet:
"When a certain number of users (usually about 40; the number is slowly rising as the site grows) dugg the story, the Digg system automatically moved it to the site's front page."
I thought it varies? Doesn't a story get promoted at 20 diggs sometimes probably because of the amount of users on? I don't know if he means 40 at an average but it isn't always 40. - Grimdotdotdot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7No, it's more like 17 since V3 came along.
It also depends on other factors, like comments, amount of people digging other stories, click-through rate, digging speed, etc. Obviously diggs are the most important. - neilmarkellis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6So that's where cement comes from!
- Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6the point is to explain Digg to people who don't know what Digg is.
Contrary to belief of many people on Digg, the vast majority of the American public, perhaps more than 99 percent, does not know what Digg is.
(For a comparison, a recent survey found that most Americans still do not know what blogs are.)
So why does an article aimed at a non-Digg audience get on the Digg front page? Because hard-core Digg fans like to digg stories that talk about Digg! - Surefoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Site's already down. Add the concept of mirrors to that cheat sheet, if it's not there already. :P
- cdcarter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I remember when the Digg page kept getting deleted from wikipedia, because it had a low userbase and wasn't important or some ***** reason like that. That was back when you could actually have the RSS feed in your reader, because only so many stoires hit front page a day. And we had a better layout. After walking to school in 10 feet of snow up hill (both ways) digg was simple...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I often see stories marked on Digg as "Reported as inacurate", is it even possible for a story to show "Marked as Lame by Diggers"? If so, this article deserves it.
- neilmarkellis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5No the relays don't need cathodes now.
- treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7OK here we go, digg this...
Keith Harrison (Diggnation cameraman) Needs a Wikipedia Page!
http://digg.com/tech_news/Keith_Harrison_Diggnation_cameraman_Needs_a_Wikipedia_Page - sh0elace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ha, the diggers just flooded the Digg cheatsheet. Defeated, the cheatsheet is.
- hagrin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'm sorry, but this is so friggen lame, if not inaccurate at times. I love how when they describe the Digg Effect on their "cheatsheet", they have to link to another article (wow, wish my cheatsheets in college could link back to my textbook) and don't even describe anything past the increase in traffic. How about sites being bombarded by traffic that they start serving 404 errors?
Lamest ... article ... ever. - xswag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Thats the ugliest website I've seen in ages. No digg for this pathetic attempt at site traffic. Poster is the owner of the website. This is just spam IMO from some crap site.
Bury this trash. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3*cough* You forgot Posh suicide heh.
- macewan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3marked as rather silly
- JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yes. But now is nothing more than an inmense cementery.
- cdcarter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The difference is drop shadows. And pastel colours, and big fonts. And making a big deal out of following web standards when your page doesn't validate because of the stupid JS hacked into it.
- anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I thought a "cheatsheet" is something that's designed so you can get ahead of everyone else in something? How does telling me how to pronounce 'digg' constitute a cheat!
- HMMaster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Who made the technology: Digg employees
They better tell me something i dont know >_> - dbuttry, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3>>"Clicking the yellow digg box for a story sends you to that story's comments page." LOL...I really hate to admit it, but I did not know that. I have been clicking the comments link all this time!
- evanfrey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hold stick near centre of its length. Moisten pointed end in mouth. Insert in tooth space, blunt end next to gum. Use gentle in-out motion.
- 1337hx0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The funniest part of the article, is the comparison to Slashdot: Slashdot is more stately, with richer discussions.
"Digg founder Kevin Rose first pitched his vote-based content idea to this old-school technology community. Slashdot is an older, more stately community where stories are written by users and hand-picked by editors. There are fewer stories, older users, longer excerpts, and often richer discussions." - ocram, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I think step 1 should include submitting stories about digg.
- modsuperstar, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I love how everyone takes this article seriously and badmouths it. You do realize it's from Valleywag, right? It's not like the article was meant to be the be all, end all resource on Digg.
- mulls, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I get that it's Valleywag - but a Google employee doesn't know what Digg is...and then shows a lack of hubris by actually admitting it? Starting to lower the bar over there....
- kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's a gross exaggeration of the truth.
I'm sure plenty of digg users like apple.
The Basics (new additions)
-Fanboys of digg and anything digg related or anything related to Kevin Rose
-They apparently will digg anything having to do with 'boogers'.
-They compensate for not having any 'real' friends in life by 'friending' 300 fellow digg users.
-They would rather get promoted to the front page than get into Yale. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Uh, this wasn't the Janitor at Google that said that was it?
- eznihm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2it's not too bad when you realize that vallywag caters to clueless PR flaks in silicon valley. wannabe sales douchebags love to have phony-baloney info on something cool.
- CaffiendCA, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@brstilson
The tubes are the same size, but rather than gravity, they use this pump thingy. Speeds it all up! - sox11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1please explain the point of this.....
- virtualmachine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Marked as lame.
This has to be one of the worst front page articles I have seen in quite some time, lets bury this pile. - n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Doesn't everybody hate Bush?
- garreh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well I was hoping for something a little more technical than the obvious. =/
- cazabam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why would I want to 'namedrop' digg? If I got a link from here, and tell somebody else, I can honestly say "I got it off digg". For anything else, namedropping websites just makes you sound desperate.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I agree with the comment about the 'Cabals', manpulating the system in that way - that really pisses me off - the interesitng stuff misses the front page so often as the stories just don't get Dugg...
- activeyaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thanks for the link, just ordered an Endless pool.
- mjar81, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4marked as lame.
- raptordrew, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Wait, so I'm confused - we can't say "digged?!?" I think my whole world is ending.... haha
But seriously, how else would we say we ..."digged" something? -
Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is