What is Digg?113 Comments
- kevinrose, on 10/14/2007, -22/+126This (like the other story) has been removed due to reports. Please see our recent blog post:
"Missing stories: A common question we receive is the confusion surrounding missing stories. Once a story has received enough user reports it is automatically removed from the digg queue or homepage (depending on where the story is living at that time). The number of reports required varies depending on how many diggs the story has. This system is going to change in the near future. Soon, reported stories will fall into a 'buried stories' bin. Users will have the ability to pick through this story bin and vote to have a story reinstated should they believe it was falsely reported."
This story alone has 3 pages of negative reports. I captured a page here:
http://krose.typepad.com/report.gif
Also, GoDaddy does not sponsor Digg. GoDaddy sponsors Revision3 the company that handles the diggnation podcast.
Hope this helps clear things up. - markoj, on 10/12/2007, -11/+37What's your explaination for these "Digg Censorship" stories not appearing on front page, with 300 diggs in under 3 hrs? Another one:
http://digg.com/technology/Digg_Corrupted
Come on Kevin, you better be honest on this one, no burying the truth now that all major web-news outlets are covering this. - kevinrose, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Where do you see it missing?
- Polaris75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10When stories get voted off the front page they disappear from search results too. It has happened to a couple things I have posted as well.
- SnowSurfns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10how do you know that enough people just didn't vote it as spam? I think it is 10 votes and it gets taken off..
- eschatonik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10This is complete yellow journalism. It has most certainly NOT been removed from the database. I'm looking at it right now. It is much more likely that the article simply got removed from the homepage becuase it WAS LAME (I know I lame'd it, I'm sure others did too. Why? Because it was LAME)
http://digg.com/technology/The_Truth_About_GoDaddy_s_Economy_%285GB_250GB%29_Plan - PercyKittenz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Everything that gets voted off the front page is also removed from the search. There aren't any editors to delete stories from the history, because all the editors are Digg users! There aren't admins that patrol the site to find offensive stories because that's supposed to be up to users to do. So, when they decide that a story shouldn't be on the front page and vote to remove it for one reason or another, it gets deleted. Kevin Rose has said on a recent interview that he plans to change this and make stories that are removed from the front page go into a "buried stories" queue, so if they get more positive votes, they can get put back on the page, which is something Digg has needed for a long time.
- junk92, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8You know in order to be more transparent I think it would be great if digg will display also the negative diggs beside the positive diggs, this way people will have a better understanding of the system
- alexandreracine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It would be nice if we could see the status of a post, let's say :
Diggs : 444
Spam : 2
Inacurate : 99 - samiam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I can understand having them come off the homepage, but making them disappear from history? That seems a bit extreme...
- hchaudh1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I would like to know who the sponsors are.
- synmoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I'm digging this beacause it needs to be seen, but the person writing that page isn't very bright. They can still provide that much total transfer a month, but if you have a whole bunch of people hitting a 70 meg file at once, from a shared account... of course transfers are going to time out. It's almost like a DoS on other accounts. Other accounts on that server need the bandwidth just as much. Bandwidth and transfer are two different things. They are providing the service as they stated. It's just like the digg effect. You get a lot of people on one thing at a time, it's going to go down. I side with GoDaddy.
The bait and switch was them offering a dedicated server for him. GoDaddy's support was great here. - Matt2k, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Don't be stupid. If a story gets enough votes as "LAME", then it is removed from the frontpage and from the search. Much like this story will be shortly.
It's still available in your digg history and commented stories (profile)
Get off the crack pipe - brickballs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5godaddy sponsors diggnation.
And downloads craping out more than 1% of the time is a signifigant problem.
besides that though, you do have a point that the bandwidth limit wasnt the issue. - Andir, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9You're all retarded. You know that, right?
Digg is a biased news site becuase you make it biased. If "x" number of people vote a particular way on a story it will disappear. We are back to the original problem with digg when it hit the first popularity curve. People post stories. The story links to their own personal blogs, or some redirector to track internet movement for advertising or whatnot. If that link doesn't make it to the front page, they cry foul and post an article pointing to their own blog on how Digg censors. Every single one of you that dugg this story are blind to this fact apparently.
Digg has gone to hell because of it's users. Not it's host. - Mr.Glass, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5dugg it to see peeps comments. somehow, i dont see kevin rose doing this.
- dignan2681, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I wish it had been removed. This is an attack on a company. The only informative in this "story" is the response from GoDaddy. They gave you good intelligent advice. They tested your issue and personally responded to every email you sent them (that's a lot more than most companies do). You are using a shared hosting account on a plan labeled "Economy" yet you seem to expect the level of service provided by dedicated servers on what some might call "Pro" plans. If it is so important that people get your podcast so darn fast then you might want to look into a dedicated service.
Also, people are right. They did not remove the story from Digg because GoDaddy is a sponsor. The original story is still on the site. However, considering this is not really a story but more of an html formatted flame, it should be removed. - booberry, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Dear God, Yeah someone who's made a great name for himself is going to be so obvious as to censor criticism and be shady. Whatever. Get off Kevins back for god sake. You come here, you give your voice, and hopefully you know how this place works. You really can just leave if you dont like digg. If you do, those who know how things work will not miss you.
- Durrok, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Awesome, so we know we have 16 users doing this meaning that anytime anyone posts a story about it we have up to 16 people who are going to mark the story as inaccuracte.
Most of us have seen this happening for awhile Kevin. Digg is still a great site. Just come up with some way to fix this please. (Max number of stories submitted in a day would help I think, or maybe some sort of merit system for handing out diggs. Like every comment you make is one more digg you can do, and when you get + diggs on your comments you could digg more stories.) - zodiacal, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5i heard they are going to create a section soon where scraped stories go...
- rauz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Happened to that Chappelle story a day ago or so too. But maybe it was marked as Spam since it wasn't tech related...but I still didn't think it should've been deleted - maybe just moved off the frontpage.
- distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8First of all, about your story, I don't see what your problem is. If anything, I'm impressed by GoDaddy's customer support.
The download stopping at 3% has nothing to do with your maximum bandwidth being reached, so I'm curious why you keep bringing that up as an issue. If that were the case, you wouldn't even be able to start the download anymore.
The guy even suggested you use bit torrent. How the hell is that trying to bait and switch you?
And about the censorship thing, I'm sure your story was just voted away. And where have you seen that GoDaddy is a sponser? I've only seen google ads. - j0c1f3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5The price for freedom is constant diligence.....We trust you Kevin.....but no one get a free pass.....keep this real.....or WE WILL notice.....be cool Kev.
- ericpp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4GoDaddy is a DIGGNATION sponsor, not a DIGG sponsor.
- JaredRR, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Digg was down for a while yesterday and several stories went away (including one on mind mapping techniques).
It may be just bad timing instead of a planned removal. - ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4When stories get marked as lame (like this one) they disappear from the front page and search results...
- Dozer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3a story isn't promoted based only on the amount diggs, it is also based on how fast it gets diggs.
- KC311Man, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This one's been pulled from the font page as well. But to digg's credit, this story stayed on long enough to get over 2000 diggs.
http://digg.com/apple/GoDaddy.com_Hates_Mac_Users - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Journalism?
Did you read the article? - artemus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Guys, you only need to lame an article 10 times before it is removed. If they are removed, it is because the articles become an occasion for flame wars.
Personally, I think that there is a bigger problem than that. the teal problem with digg is that the criteria for article promotion is skewed. An article that has thirty or more diggs will get promoted, while one that has say, 200 or more will stay in the queue. This leads to an incredible imbalance in the system, and it needs to be fixed. - philovivero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Everything that gets voted off the front page is also removed from the search. There aren't any editors to delete stories from the history, because all the editors are Digg users! There aren't admins that patrol the site to find offensive stories because that's supposed to be up to users to do. So, when they decide that a story shouldn't be on the front page and vote to remove it for one reason or another, it gets deleted."
Thanks for the defense, Percy, but that's not entirely true. We do have admins that patrol the site for articles that violate TOS. Usually they notice because a story has a few reports on it, and they go check it out and see it needs further action. But you are sort of right, in that a vast majority of stories that "disappear" are disappeared by the Digg users themselves.
Back in the day, when Digg was small and low-volume, maybe the disappeared-by-Digg ratio was 1-5%, but now it's probably more like 0.01-0.1%. We have two (sometimes three) Digg admins. If they tried to patrol all the stories all the time... well, they'd have to work three shifts a day, which just doesn't leave a lot of time for sleeping.
As for this "The truth about godaddy" story, I doubt it was deleted because of a sponsorship agreement. More likely because it was lame and contained baseless accusations. I'm sure Godaddy does some shady stuff (I went to it yesterday with a non-Firefox browser and was attacked by popups), but if you're going to attack the company, you need to have some evidence.
Digg users aren't very forgiving of shoddy journalism. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If anyone wants proof that Digg staff members do not censor stores, here it is.
http://digg.com/gaming/Blizzard_apologizes_for_GLBT_guild_warning
Two months ago, Dan Huard wrote:
"Please comment on the story and not your personal views of sexual preference. Any trolling/flaming that goes on will get a permanent ban. No excuses."
AND
"Every comment is getting reviewed on this thread. Any name calling, blatant homophobia, etc. WILL NOT be tolerated. Some truly ignorant people came out of the woodwork when this story first broke...even long time digg users. No excuses, be tolerant."
AND
"You know I mean...there are levels you just don't go beyond. When this story first broke, there were extreme derogatory comments directed toward gay and lesbians. Such behavior will not be tolerated and is explicity against the Terms of Service. If you need a rehash you can view them at digg.com/tos"
AND
"'Hey Dan, I mean no disrespect, but how about letting the users moderate the comments. Is the 'Rate Comment' feature used in conjunction with each users comment level threshold not good enough?'
"100% agree. In every other situation that is the case. But the original story about this turned into a hate thread. It just wasn't moderated 'enough.' Hate comments weren't getting moderated down, unfortunately. This thread is getting watched only to preserve the integrity of digg."
AND
"'To review, threatening to ban people doesn't scare the bad eggs, but offends your 'play nice' fan base.'
"Noted...Maybe the language of my comment was too gestapo. I'm just trying to convey that if you care about this community, you'll post intelligently, if not there are consequences. This is a sensitive subject and a portion of the community already showed that they cannot handle that. Doling out consequences was a bit harsh."
AND
"When I said 'post intelligently' I mean non hateful posts. Sorry, that was a bit subjective."
#####
Notice how he started backsliding after the first post. The reason for that is nearly everyone in the thread made fun of him and called him a Nazi. It seemed that no one had any fear of getting banned.
If Digg has "moderators" who censor stories, why didn't Dan Huard just remove that post? I mean, *****! People in the Blizzard thread just before that one had made blatant hate speech comments. Why wasn't that post "censored"? Don't you think threads like that offend sponsors? If Dan Huard has the power to just ban anyone he wants, why didn't I get banned for calling him a girl?
It's clear to me that this conspiracy theory is just not feasible.
I literally cannot imagine the thought process that goes into reaching that conclusion.
Unless...unless it's all *****.
Look at the "stories dugg" history of our friend Dee-Vee. You'll see he's dugg a LOT of privacy issue posts. That's okay...everyone cares about privacy. Privacy is (almost) a non-partisan issue. (I'm sure a lot of people either weren't old enough to vote or didn't think about privacy when Clinton was President, but I can't read anyone's mind. All I can say is that, on the face of it, privacy is a non-partisan issue.) But then there's that story he dugg about Bill O'Reilly on page two. I can't see what Bill O'Reilly has to do with tech, but I CAN see how he would interest a liberal extremist.
It looks to me like the people pushing this conspiracy theory are liberals who want to spam Digg with politcal content. They're offended that their posts get blocked, so they're trying to pull some MoveOn.com tactics.
Digg staff:
If you think Digg can hold out until you break it up into politics.digg.com and tech.digg.com and so on, maybe you won't have to ban them, but you must realize that these people are willfully abusing the TOS. Maybe they can behave themselves on a subdomain of their own--maybe they can't. I just think you need to take into account that they are going to continue their attempts to ruin the entire site until that time comes. - Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Godaddy doesn't sponsor digg.com. And the story was removed because people reported as lame, and rightly so!
- xLiKx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4no surprise. if there's a negative story on godaddy.com, do you think it'll be pulled too?
- keng, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Thank you Kevin but shouldn't it still be under stories submitted?
Thanks - inajeep, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Everything is better when it's clear and in the open. Thanks for the clarity.
- samfrench, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5wow this sucks
- madcat87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ha.This one is off the front too already :)
- RevnCliffie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Hmmm story is 122 days old....guess someone just can't let go.
- cbags, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Yeah I noticed that aswell...so slashdot is 122 days behind Digg
- ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3man, those censorbots sure are quick. this one was already "disappeared"
- Iriel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Okay, I think half the people on this board need to toss their tinfoil hats in the trash and grow up. I'll give this story a grain of salt for a second for the sake of argument. But for all the "(random obscenity) Digg!" Digg users; consider this:
- You make a site like this
- You pay for the hosting
- You keep the sponsors happy because the bandwidth bill should be posteded on space.com
- You keep up that balancing act without pissing off the so-called 'fans' who bitch worse than /.ers in a typical Microsoft vs. Linux thread.
Do all that assuming that Digg moderators even removed the story instead of the more logical possibility that your fellow users with opposing viewpoints didn't flag it down as SPAM or something of the like. - masterdebater, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Please. I've been with GoDaddy for over 2 years and they suck. The reason I didn't move sooner is because I'm semi-competitant and never needed to use their support - until the day I needed to, and the form responses I got back was stunning to say the least. After giving them about a grand in hosting fees over two years (I paid monthly) for a virtual dedicated server - I'm gone and slowly moving all 30 domains to another provider (my billing expires in May - so basically they don't know it's coming - and frankly I don't think they care - and yes, for some reason I have my own account executive who e-mails me regularly.). My sites on Dreamhost are rock solid, always responsive and im actually using MORE bandwidth now than I was before using a Virtual Dedicated server. GoDaddy uses crap equipment (yes - I spent nights staring at "top" in the shell) watching my server loads run about 1.5 - 4.0 - then strangely the DNS server would shut down and I'd have to keep reloading it. The final straw of course was upgrading from php 4.2.x to 4.4.x (reading their TOS states they should be installing it with every new virtual dedicated server with Plesk - that is v.4.4.x) as my script needed 4.4 or better. Nightmare. Support - absolutely no help at all - they advise me to perform the upgrade with absolutely no help whatsoever of where to find the package (I can install it myself, I understand RPM/compiled binary installs). So I do best effort and b0rk the server, since the version of PHP they use is some strange one from SWSOFT and after upgrading blew out all the dependancies and broke every damn extension - including apache httpd). I can't ask them to roll it back or else they will do a clean install and wipe everything, so after that - I moved, that same night. I'm gone from GoDaddy and I'm making as many people aware of them as possible. They simply suck and that's WITH experience.
- Soma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I liked digg much more when it was a tight knit community, when stories with 300 diggs were HUGE. Ah, the good ol' days. Like anything though, when too many people start using it, it becomes totally stupid.
- CalvinLawson, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Yes we do; we pay with our time and effort. Without users Digg would not exist. They should pay us!
- PrezKennedy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I voted that story as lame. Other people possibly did too, hence its disappearance from the front page.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4This is what revolution looks like. The people pushing these stories are the same people pushing political content on Digg. They're using the same ***** tactics they learned from MoveOn.com You need to nip this in the bud. Start banning!
- masterdebater, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I completely agree - if I started linking to child porn sites using DIGG - talking about some new fangled webcam technology that allowed for completely anonymous viewing of live child porn - there had BETTER be some mechanism in place to remove that story. The internet is not a catalyst for free speech - not anymore - not now - not ever - don't ever pretend that it is. Everything is tracked, watched, monitored and can be traced back to you given enough resources and time. Its all about risk. vs. reward, on both sides of the legal fence.
- keng, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6it aint so. see Kevin's response above.
- mathew_bug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is out from the frontpage
-
Show 51 - 100 of 110 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 