digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Cheatsheet for Digg.com: How it works and how to namedrop it

valleywag.com — "When I'm talking to clients," a seemingly well-informed Google employee told me over brunch, "I want to mention Digg. I know it's something I'm supposed to know about, but I don't." No worries. For everyone who needs a refresher on Digg, we have an exhaustive cheatsheet for the popular site.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -6/+59In all honesty, if you're reading this, you should know how Digg works by now... ;)
    • chickenstrip, on 10/12/2007, -31/+6lame no digg

      (lolz)
    • 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?
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • ocram, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I think step 1 should include submitting stories about digg.
    • mjar81, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4marked as lame.
    • mhockey14221, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1yo man i "digged" this

      ... dont come and kill me now
    • garreh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well I was hoping for something a little more technical than the obvious. =/
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Uh, this wasn't the Janitor at Google that said that was it?
  • maxputer, on 10/12/2007, -28/+3LOL "Don't say digged" HA-HA that's mint.
  • ionut, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26This article is better:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digg
  • n0yd, on 10/12/2007, -18/+10Marked as lame, if you need to read this article, you are lame.
    • 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.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20What's the difference between 1.0 and 2.0? Bigger Tubes?
    • digitaldivider, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4no difference between web 1.0 and 2.0.. web 2.0 is ***** ajax.
    • neilmarkellis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5No the relays don't need cathodes now.
    • 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.
    • 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!
  • 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.
  • opitica, on 10/12/2007, -18/+5Summary:
    How to talk about digg in the real world:
    "Hey you see that site on digg? What, you don't know what digg is? Get the hell away from me."
    • seinman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18You don't have very many friends, do you?
  • 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.
    • 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.
  • 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.
  • MyLittlePony, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Quick, somebody post a cheatsheet for YouTube!
  • Bigbro69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9There's a real world?
    • JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yes. But now is nothing more than an inmense cementery.
    • neilmarkellis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6So that's where cement comes from!
  • HMMaster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Who made the technology: Digg employees
    They better tell me something i dont know >_>
  • andrethegiant, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4"Don't say: 'Digged' "

    Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged Digged

    I'm surprised this even got submitted to digg... the digg faq explains everything thoroughly.
    • 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?
  • 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
    • sh0elace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ha, the diggers just flooded the Digg cheatsheet. Defeated, the cheatsheet is.
  • n0yd, 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.
    • 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.
  • sox11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1please explain the point of this.....
    • 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!
  • dblondon, 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...
  • 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!
  • activeyaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thanks for the link, just ordered an Endless pool.
  • 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.
  • UU7etc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3*cough* You forgot Posh suicide heh.
  • 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.
  • 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!
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • gxcdesign, 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
    • 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.
    • n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Doesn't everybody hate Bush?
  • 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."
  • 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....
  • macewan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3marked as rather silly
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.