What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
69 Comments
- lechatron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17You can report right now that you got buried.
- ShaferAtSlate, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14Me neither, but they're educable.
- Pitfan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I was mentioned on slate? I never expected that. I should submit stories more often!
- violentvinyl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Will my quest offend Digg users as an evil manipulation of their beloved site and prompt them to bury my submission?"
Hate to be the one to break this to you buddy, but articles like yours dont get buried or trashed in the comments because we're offended, it gets buried because there's no "Been There, Done That" button. Someone using Digg to promote an article? WOW! Never seen that before! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Slate just reeks of the dot com era, somehow it borrowed more time than any such relic deserves. I'll stick with digg...
- Darkness123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You are correct, I think Blogspot also have Digg this story not sure, someone might wanna correct me on this. Won't be too long before CNN and Fox etc etc add "Digg This Article"
- sembetu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yea! Everybody woke up to the fact that users matter. Great, now I'll go commit suicide while unimaginative companies around the net all get diggified...
- exoendo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4maybe it'll make his next article a bit more interesting. I bet he wasn't expecting this.
- mc_hambone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4spam...
- mnrosebud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@oxymoron69
The power of ones intellect can be ascertained by reading his comment. Honestly if using swear words and bigotry are how people express their ideas now how are we going to actually get anything solved. This article does not even have the visage of that mans site with the advertisements by pixel. Besides that man made a load of money off of that site, big green giant eh? But unless you actually managed to make a point in that needless excuse for a comment I do not need to read your swearing. Use actual words, that have actual meaning (and that does not include an angry adj.) because let's just face it
******er (noun vulgar slang) a contemptible or stupid person is not equivalent to a website. Bury this if you choose, but after you read it take some of it to heart and think before you swear brainlessly. A curse word may work once in a while but if the comment is chock full of them it says nothing for your cause. - exoendo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Im in a bind. If any other user tried to pull a stunt experiment like this at a small website, they would get flamed beyond belief and quickly buried.
But because it's slate we are supposed to act different?
It's already been established, digg drives traffic. There really isn't much need for such an experiment. And thus, though I do realize it would be nice to show the outside world what digg is made of, I am sticking to my priniciples and burying this story.
Ta,
- Exo - gerg1352, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm pretty disgusted by the reaction to the Slate article and, as someone who had heard of Digg but simply hadn't paid it much attention since there seems to be a new concept every day the Web, I was intrigued enough to check out Digg.
This whole experiment has shown the problem with Digg quite effectively. Digg's culture is essentially a kind of mob, not much different from the dynamic that causes riots, prison breaks and lynchings.
Where do I go to say I don't digg Digg, now? - Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2(feels odd including "Slate" with the other "MSM" -- just 10 years ago Slate was the new kid on the block and the rest of the media eyed it with the same sort of skepticism that Digg is getting now)
- violentvinyl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Disagree, I think alot of Slate articles (even older ones) are appealing to Diggers, at least in my personal experience.
- scout29c, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Came and joined Digg because of what I read at Shafer’s post on Slate. I was aware of Digg, (What kind of net nerd would I be if I hadn’t a least visited Digg before?), but my interest was more in politics and news.
Used to go to the library regularly to read articles from publications I didn’t have subscriptions to, but not any more. Since the rise of the internet world, I have read some of the best stuff I have ever read. Is this a great country, or what?
I check all the most popular entries at places like Yahoo, NYTimes, and idiocies such as Technorati. Now, I will be doing the same at Digg. Could a news/information junky do otherwise? Voting on something will be a new experience. I also like to comment every now and then, as thusly I post. - mic_dee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Mr Shafer, do you suppose the prevalence of "meth-mouth" is higher amoung the DIgg user base or in the many meth capitals of the world that dot the west coast?
I read Press Box regularly and I check Slate and Digg daily, I loved the piece. - rhsjr7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't like bigots, has nothing to do with the story per-say, Neither did his bigoted comment.
- Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The Digg fanboys clicked not to digg Slate but to bury Slate...
Just as so many in the so-called MSM don't understand or know about sites like Digg (I know a reporter who last week had to do a story about Craigslist coming to his town -- and he had never heard of Craigslist before), many of Digg's most ardent groupies don't get that most media consumers won't learn about Digg until they see stories about it in from places like Slate.
The fanboys also fail to grasp that without the MSM, Digg would have far fewer stories to pick from. Digg has tons of stories from The New York Times, CNN, USA Today, local TV stations, Slate and the like. Each complements the other's business. - ShaferAtSlate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Thanks, SublimeRuin.
- diabeticfeed, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I did not digg this at all. Though some may find humor in writing a story about being dugg on digg just to submit it to digg so it gets dugg - there was no actual humor in the piece. It was just "meta" regurgitation. It is cute, now. Once. The wad is blown, Mr. Jack Shafer. Good luck, next time.
- Hickeroar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I don't think the author did an ounce of research before writing his article. Someone who read it and knew nothing of digg would immediatley think the stories making it to the front page based on user feedback was a feature just added in the last release. Digg works that way...period. Always has. Get with the program...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Sounds like this Shafer guy is trying to earn his place as Digg's own Ric Romero.
- EvilCheeseWedge, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I'm a Digg user and a Slate user (altough to be honest, I probably spend more time on Slate than Digg.) Well, this expirement was interesting enough. Looks like the story made #1 for the moment. Of course, Shafer makes a good point, it seems like many of the top stories on Digg tend to be about Digg. I hope the expirement will be updated later on so we can find out how many hits Digg generated for the story.
- arizonagroove, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5You know what should be banned from Digg? Any article/blog/whatever that features a link marked 'digg this' or similar.
- tHePeOPle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I eagerly await more of your incredible advanced user wisdom. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.
- bndocksnt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Why are we digging down the author (ShaferAtSlate) ? Digg him up! I thought we only buried negative and pointless comments here (like, perhaps, this one).
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Like the Leo & Woz love fest you sometimes see on TWIT?
Thats scary. - winchester, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I think this would be a great exercise in the discernment of the Digg user. He makes an interesting and very true point in that he exposes the hubris of the Digg users in constantly running up stories that deal only with the sites status. I can't imagine that Jay or Kevin want their company to be constantly navel gazing. Bury this story and bury it like no story has ever been buried. Destroy it so that Slate and the rest of the media knows that Digg is not only a powerful presence on the web, but interested in legitimate news and groundbreaking technologies, not simple grandstanding.
- ShaferAtSlate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Yes, you were my inspiration.
- joehobbes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2why? I don't see anything wrong with that...
- gwayne, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Fun article..
p.s. fanboys and their venom are a recipe for hilarity - ShaferAtSlate, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Nah. Most Digg users seem to have a good grip on their dental hygiene. Thanks for your note.
--Jack - rhsjr7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2oxymoron69:
Your name says it all. Birth name? If I were your parents I'd have gone with Dave, or Bob, or Neil....
You're a self important pompous bigot. - urbanight23, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4In an odd twist, I actually found the article on slate first. Digg for the experiment
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@rhsjr7
so what exactly do you like about this ***** story that you would attack someone expressing their own opinion on it? - epheterson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Burried :-/
Sucks for the story - BillyEveryteen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Digg me, Bury me, anyway you want me!
- AMSRay, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I wish I could give two digs, one for being interesting and one for submitting original content that you created yourself!
- ebob, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I guess that I'm not average. I have both Slate and digg/Technology feeds in my Bookmarks. I actually saw this on Slate first and thought that I was looking at the digg feed. I had to search for this submission, though (I didn't see a link to the digg submission in the Slate article). This should be interesting.
- DisposableRob, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"submitting original content that you created yourself! "
Usually, we call that Blog Spam. - epheterson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Thanks for spreading the news about digg. I'd love to see community voting features on slate, it'd help us decide what is digg-worthy!
- kpearce, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Fun! I just don't see the average Slate reader being a Digger...
- Hickeroar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3*edit* His piece is, however, a very fun read... Makes ya proud to be part of the process.
- joelito, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"Usually, we call that Blog Spam."
I think what we call blog spam is when someone post non original content on their blogs and then submit the blog post on Digg... - itsnotvalid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I guess your experiment succeeded.
- jj555298, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I'm hesitant with digg's direction especially with what further growth could mean, maybe I'm just a pessimist.
- superfan99, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2ditto. i also found it first on slate and then on digg. i think both are great sites and probably have a lot more cross-over than you think.
- oxymoron69, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1sorry, i work in a call center which services americans...
they make me swear a whole ***** of a lot. ignorance breeds ignorance, i feel i've been contaminated!
next time i will save all curses for one uber comment with no cohesive thoughts, just vulgar language.
thank you for your opinions digg! lol - exoendo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1He'll get to explore angles he hadn't considered.
- MuddyPitch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Great, now I'm going to have that song in my head for the rest of the day.
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
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