What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history – the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
52 Comments
- gnews, on 09/18/2008, -4/+52The Boss: "I loved Digg and will continue to love it; my love for digg is not conditional." ... cool attitude.
- inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+29if scripts are not allowed why does http://apidoc.digg.com exist? This is not some 3rd party site, this is digg saying "we have an api that you can write programs to use". If scripts are not allowed they should not provide an interface for the scripts to use. And before someone tries to say script != program, a script is a program, just usually interpreted at runtime (like old basic was commonly done) as opposed to being converted to machine language before hand.
I think its shady of digg to say "we have this interface" and bury in the TOS "but if you use it we will ban you". - inactive, on 09/19/2008, -3/+25Well it was a creative tool and looked pretty interesting. But in all fairness it was against the TOS of Digg. You made the mistake on not asking digg if you can use it or not. You should have verified with them before you shared it and used it.
- inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+19btw the digg apidoc license http://apidoc.digg.com/LicenseAgreement agreement states:
11. MISCELLANEOUS - This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between Licensee and Digg pertaining to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes any and all written or oral agreements with respect to such subject matter.
supersedes any and all written and oral agreements ... I would think that the TOS is an agreement in written form. The "subject matter" appears to be scripts and the use of their API. - Junior612, on 09/19/2008, -2/+19So do I Digg this to expose this to other users or do I bury it because it got this popular from a script?
- awesometastic1, on 09/19/2008, -0/+14this changes everything. If he's using digg's own API how can they ban him for it? What's the point of even having an API then? So you can look trendy and maybe get someone actually interested in buying digg despite your poor running of it? WTF?
Seriously digg. I was on your side for banning "cheaters" like diggboss, but it turns out he wasn't cheating at all. He just used your api to make YOUR SITE BETTER and you banned him and a bunch of others for it.
Why don't you just ban everybody who clicks the digg buttons people place on their sites too? I mean, technically that's using a script to isn't it?
This is messed up. - Zdax, on 09/19/2008, -1/+15There is an extension for Digg that tells you when your friends submit something, you know? Four diggs in less than a minute is very possible without cheating.
- inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+11Digg allows people to use it's API, but it seems that the only way to use it without breaching the ToS is only to SHOW data, not alter it. And even then, that seems kinda hard to do without risking getting banned, because even trying to show data may lead to "blind digging" and other things people around here seem to hate about power users.
- sungoddess808, on 09/19/2008, -3/+13That is not an example of "automated" digging, and no, they did not deserve to be banned. Those folks who dugg this article first are people who like The Boss, and know of his complete dedication to this community. It was not a long interview and required very little time to read.
In case you haven't read his articles, SirPopper submits nothing but quality content. It's no different from going to a grocery store and selecting a name brand over generic. He is consistent and you can always count on an outstanding submission. - brainnovate, on 09/19/2008, -0/+8According to your comment here: http://digg.com/tech_news/PLEASE_Stop_Re_Shouting_ ... you questioned the whether the extension he made was permissible, and emailed digg support about it. He was banned minutes later.
- life38, on 09/19/2008, -1/+9As this issue about scripts and shouts has evolved it made me realize that some of my mutual friends wanted me to keep track of all of their posts and digg their posts. However, I am torn because it takes a balance of non mutual friends to go popular. There are times I do not want all of my friends to digg my story because of Diggs coding. So I will do what I can and hopefully balance what different think folks want as my mutual friends.
- bixby1, on 09/19/2008, -0/+7Well Crampy20, the only thing you proved is that you're a generally negative person. I looked at your recent comments and what you seem to enjoy most is blasting people on the internet. For you digg is just some negatively charged anger outlet. Good for you.
- inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+7That's one of the main founding ideas that makes Digg a "social" news site.
- doiveo, on 09/19/2008, -0/+7The banning was a protectionist move on Digg's part and I don't think it was the right move. If your system can be gamed then it is up to you to change, innovated or evolve your way out. Banning your top customers is just bad business. Integrate the scripts so everyone can use them and modify the the algorithm so they don't have a big effect. Digg is broke, not its most ardent users and supporters.
- awesometastic1, on 09/19/2008, -0/+6exactly. Originally i thought it was just some script someone wrote, which is why i asked them. Had i known he was using the digg API i would have definitely used it without asking digg. I mean, what kind of messed up site bans it's own users for using their API??? Oh ya, sorry digg does apparently.
- awesometastic1, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5according to his website he did try to verify it with digg, but was banned as their response.
- brainnovate, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5No kidding. I asked that on a different thread. Digg actually replied that they have never banned for API abuse or apps (which is good.) But they wouldn't comment on this case...
- brainnovate, on 09/19/2008, -0/+5I think most people were banned for using a script from a lesser known user OliverTaco. He wrote the original Digg Shouts Easier Script. It added the digg button on pages that don't normally have one. Thats the one that raised the Digg Server's blood pressure and got people canned by Digg.
DiggBoss apparently got caught up in the Dragnet after your email to Digg support. (see comments http://digg.com/tech_news/PLEASE_Stop_Re_Shouting_ ... Not sure why they would say its against TOS... - inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+4Yeah, because the Digg crew actually uses IP bans. Because they're SO effective.
- veins, on 09/19/2008, -1/+5what makes digg suck are all these articles about banning the top diggers. theyre contributing articles that they find interesting so what does it matter if theyre using scripts.
what is so interesting about a screenshot telling me that mrbabyman has dugg 1000 times? how does that affect me one bit? and banning a top user and contributor to your site isnt gonna help anything - Surferess, on 09/19/2008, -1/+4FYI Pretty sure MBM has been banned before too. Get off that, geez!
- Surferess, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3I once wrote to digg to see about scripts. The email was left unanswered.
- brainnovate, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3You are an incorrect in assuming that 4 diggs in the first minute means they are automated. DiggBoss is one of the nicest, most helpful guys around here, and he has a lot of friends. Maybe its not possible to understand this exactly, but a lot of people are pretty unhappy about his demise, and jump at the opportunity to digg something like this.
- jmaica26, on 09/19/2008, -2/+5Digg have always been interesting.
- inactive, on 09/19/2008, -1/+4Hey, ThinkBox. Nobody's forcing you to stay here. If you don't like what Digg has "become" (or rather, has always been since the beginning), then go sign up at Reddit.
- tbhurst, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2Well said. The Digg folks could take a lesson from all of this, swallow their pride and adopt some of these tools - tools which sound like they make shouting more effective and less spammy.
- TheInfernoSin, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2He was a former friend of mines here at did :D
- notque, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2I was 1 of the first 4 diggs I think. I saw the article on twitter, and dugg it within a minute or so.
Your assumptions are wrong. - GamingForever, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2A bunch of users used diggboss's script and were banned for it. None of them knew it was bad to use.
- Surferess, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2Grammar Nazi!
- gnews, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2This is a simple one, it says "Digg Bannings: Interview with Diggboss" 60 seconds later... digg digg digg digg
- inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2this makes me the most popular with 6523 fans
"former digg user"
lulz - inactive, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2yeah, cause whatever babyman submits is better than what i submit,
nice armani suit you got there, chief - Surferess, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2For me, it was a posthumous honorary digg for Diggboss.
- georgemason01, on 09/19/2008, -0/+2From the interview: "Digg uses its TOS to its advantage."
That's the point of having a TOS. But in this case I don't see how they're doing it for selfish reasons, as diggboss may be implying. It doesn't help them to ban users who are heavy users giving their site a lot of traffic. In this case users were using the system to promote content based on the submitter, not the submission, which results in ***** content flooding the front page. I wish "power" users could see beyond themselves and understand how they are putting the majority of Digg users at a disadvantage, both for submitters and readers. - DeskFlyer, on 09/19/2008, -2/+3I hate spiders.
- inactive, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1What a ***** dumbass comment
- AnotherDiggGuy, on 09/19/2008, -0/+1So what was Digg before the shout system was put into place???
- 4cdawgs, on 09/19/2008, -0/+1A lot of "power users" are not banned but they have supported this script in blog posts and articles for months.
- StevenBullen, on 09/19/2008, -0/+1What you mean the many shouts I get to check out stories? I can find interesting stuff myself. Plus I dont even send my close friends all good stuff I find. So why would I send it to a stranger.
- georgemason01, on 09/19/2008, -2/+2The issue is quite simple. Blind digging is retarded. Doing this subverts the concept of Digg, which is individual users promoting good content to the front page without regard to who the submitter is. Circle jerking friends submissions without regard to the content is lame. If you want to socialize go to MySpace or Facebook, where you can go far beyond shouts and blind digging in terms to connecting with other people.
- AnotherDiggGuy, on 09/19/2008, -4/+3Wow, is everyone still crying about those SEO marketing spammers getting banned? I understand they got families to feed and no one will pay more than $50 for some twitter action, but they need to go market stuff someplace else, like one of those garbage Digg clones that obviously just a bunch of spam. They can use their scripts and bots there without much notice.
Get over it, Digg is a better place now. - inactive, on 09/19/2008, -4/+2Why not MrBabyMan?!
- KyleRayner, on 09/19/2008, -5/+2"Do you think that Digg was justified in banning you due to creating your scripts? It could be said that letting users create such scripts would give them an unfair competitive advantage versus diggers just using the tools that Digg alone provides...
7. Which begs the question: what should developers that work outsite of Digg be doing with the Digg API? Colorful charts of who’s Digging what?"
It does not beg the question. It raises the question. - SqlByte, on 09/19/2008, -10/+4He is sure Digg will restore his account ? And how is that ?
- StevenBullen, on 09/19/2008, -8/+2This is starting to piss me off.
Best bet is to get rid of stupid fkin shouts and thats just a start... - ThinkBox, on 09/19/2008, -12/+4Of course he is going to say that.
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is