What is Digg?120 Comments
- xParker, on 09/12/2008, -2/+61Voting to change the name of a title (spelling or the title is completely irrelevant) or if something is NSFW and is not tagged as it we should be able to put a warning the same way something is buried as inacurate. Maybe a vote button beside Bury and it can have options like Title, Description, NSFW..
- Bukowsky, on 08/22/2008, -2/+52Can you please do something about the shout-system? It started off as a great tool for diggers to communicate, but has now morphed into a tool for 'spammers' to shout at me all day long.
Maybe limit the shouts to 2-3 per day or something along those lines... Because I've noticed ALOT of people who literally shout EVERYTHING they submit, and they shout it multiple times throughout the day.. If there was to be a limit on how much you could shout within a 24 hour time period, people would be more selective in what they shout, and we wouldn't have so much ***** send to us on a daily basis. - Bukowsky, on 08/22/2008, -5/+54Official Digg Forum? Are we ever going to get it? If so, when? how soon?
I'd rather talk to diggers thru that avenue, than attempting to wade thru all the ***** shout-spam I get. - WITFITS, on 08/22/2008, -1/+33If would be nice if possible duplicates could be flagged before filling out title, description, etc. It can be frustrating from a submission standpoint to submit a site, spend several minutes working on the appropriate descriptors and fill in the captcha, only to then find out that the same story from a different URL has already been submitted and dugg. This happens a few times and you feel like "Why should I bother trying to submit if it's going to take this long".
- somethinspecial, on 08/22/2008, -2/+25We definitely need a NSFW tag. I got nailed by the playboy.com URL posted earlier today.
- canewediggit, on 08/22/2008, -3/+26can you apply content filtering to the spy?
can you allow url filtering so i can block sites?
can you out and out ban everything coming from hubpages and squidoo already?
why you wear your pants like that? - WITFITS, on 08/22/2008, -1/+22A way to change the title or description would be really great--sometimes they are inaccurate, insufficient, or embarrassingly misspelled. Hard to say how system like that should be implemented, but the whizzes at Digg can figure that out.
Flagging for NSFW as part of a submission (or indeed after a submission, like the bury buttons) is also a good suggestion. - cards, on 08/22/2008, -5/+24The recommendation engine doesn't work. I'd imagine that's a tough pill to swallow, but it needs major work. When looking at my recommendation page, I usually find about 5 stories I bury for every one I digg.
Oh yeah, these are supposed to be questions...When will the recommendation engine be fixed? - katie10, on 08/22/2008, -4/+23Can we link articles that are the same together somehow?
For instance, people often submit the actual YouTube video to Digg, but then it ends up on Engadget or somewhere. People end up digging both articles, they sometimes both hit the front page, and it's kind-of annoying.
So, can there be some sort of feature to match duplicates and link stories together? - mikoyski, on 08/22/2008, -3/+21Can we possibly have a "1 year ago in Digg" or "2 years ago in Digg" feature, wherein front page stories from a year or 2 years ago will be displayed? I would normally digg into the archives for those old digg stories and I think this is something cool to have now since digg already has 3-4 years worth of submitted stories. Not important though, I just thought it will be a very cool feature.
- cards, on 08/22/2008, -3/+19What's the status on the interest level sliders mentioned at the last town hall? Is that still being considered?
- PseudoThink, on 08/22/2008, -3/+19How about allowing users tag stories with location data (city/state, GPS, zip code, etc.), and adding a "Local" section which can be used to filter stories by locality (defaulting to a user's stored location)? This might facilitate Digg being more useful for learning about local events and stories, enabling it to compete with local news sources too. Gotta keep 'em honest!
- inactive, on 08/22/2008, -5/+18Duplicates, duplicates, duplicates... please, somebody fix this problem. Also, are you guys working on any ways to make "BREAKING" (you get what I mean, not the actual word ^^) upcoming stories hit the frontpage faster? It just seems like sometimes stories come up long after the story has broken... making the breaking story... not breaking. That would be great,
Thanks. - WITFITS, on 08/22/2008, -6/+18"Fans of yours" is always tough to find because the link is buried on the non-obvious "Friends' History" page. An additional link on the main profile page under Friends would be sufficient to alleviate this problem.
- doublsh0t, on 08/22/2008, -0/+11I organize my comments by "most dugg" and when I click a comment's "thread" button it shows the thread in the similar hierarchical form according to the number of diggs, making it still difficult to see proper context. Can we make it to where it reverts to a chronological order when in a "thread" sub-section?
- unitedstatians, on 08/22/2008, -4/+15I wish on Digg you could favorite comments. Just as we can "favorite" a story, we should be able to favorite great comments. Will be used by those active Digg readers, who enjoy those 'coffee spilling' or 'over the head slapping' commentary so much they wish it could be dugg twice or somehow archived?
We need a 'MY #1/favorite" button for bestest comments. - ted_hosmann, on 08/22/2008, -1/+9I always thought a great feature on the Permalink page would be the ability to submit "related" stories. Users could digg/bury them right there in the Permalink page.
This would be great when an update to a story shows up on Digg - users could link back to the original story that hit Digg - even back to the related articles around the web. - inactive, on 08/22/2008, -6/+13Somehow the upcoming stories section needs more prominence to promote a more open and democratic voting process. Digg's still dependent on the "friends" system, which lead to too much mindless voting of bad submissions and places the balance of power in the hands of those who live on Digg and makes it almost impossible for a casual user (a few hours a day) to get anything made popular.
- doublsh0t, on 08/22/2008, -2/+9Sometimes I view a Top 10 digg article and forget to digg it, but I can't tell unless I go back to that article and check to see if it says "dugg". Can you possibly make a slightly different coloured counter for dugg articles? OR some way to distinguish that one has dugg the article (the little banner for when your friends have dugg something is very nice). Something like this would make it easier across the board to separate what we have dugg from what we haven't.
- AndrewDB, on 08/22/2008, -5/+12I second the support for URL Filtering, .. this way people stop bitching about Huff Po spam and I can finally get rid of the lameness that is Cracked.com articles that pop up every single day.
I also want to know when you'll allow custom add a friend messages because I'm sick of seeing "S/He became your fan because he likes what you are up to on Digg and wants to see what you think is interesting."
.. Why can't we say why we added people to our friends lists? - mark076h, on 08/22/2008, -4/+10This is probably something that a digg forum would take care of but i have been thinking about an "Ask Digg" type of submission similar how over at slashdot they have a "Ask Slashdot" where somebody posts a question about something and in the comments the readers or diggers in our case would provide answers or helpful tips, and if it is a great question you can digg it up just like a news story.
I know digg is for news but this could maybe be a whole different section but has a link on the front page you need to click on to see, and the "Ask Digg" submissions do not show up with the front page stories kinda like how the podcast section is now. - BDOUG, on 08/22/2008, -6/+12Amen. I had to start un-friending a few people who abuse shout all the time like that. Didn't want to, but the constant spam was annoying. Your proposal might also limit the 'professional submitters' a bit, too. Maybe after the 4th shout or so for that day just give them a friendly message: sorry you're to hoarse to shout right now. :-)
- ted_hosmann, on 08/22/2008, -7/+13Latest news is Adobe plans to buy Yahoo. Has Digg thought about buying Yahoo yet?
- simplyintricate, on 08/22/2008, -6/+11I would like to know where the unbury button is, I've buried article by accident in the past.
- whiteknives, on 08/22/2008, -8/+13On behalf of diggers everywhere... Is Aubs single? ;D
- EmitStop, on 08/23/2008, -2/+7Holy *****. That's not a wall, that's a tower of text!
- BlackOp, on 08/23/2008, -2/+7Couldn't agree more, especially on the 4chan/meme *****. My blocklist is so big that newly blocked idiots since maybe 2 months ago don't even fit on the settings page any more..
Will check out reddit. - simplyintricate, on 08/22/2008, -2/+6That's not what I asked for
- mark076h, on 08/22/2008, -1/+5I think she is.
- Rabbitez, on 08/22/2008, -6/+10Can you remove friends from everyone?
That way we'll only get stuff to the front page that isn't only by mrbabyman. - t2t2, on 08/22/2008, -7/+11Somehow I think digg forum would be a bad thing... With all the 4chan users pouring in...
- Daniel591992, on 08/22/2008, -4/+8Exactly, the front page is controlled by a select few, all of which have a ton of "friends." There's no reason for the average user to submit anymore.
Here's an example:
http://digg.com/users/badwithcomputer/history/shou ... - inactive, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3He's not calling himself elite.
Look at these comment threads. Garbage.
You'd have to be an idiot not to see it.
And you know what? Meme recycling doesn't require an idiot. It makes you one.
Also, the guy said that he did "***** off." He's making a point, after leaving, and sharing his experiences from his "journey." He's talking about the consequences that will happen when you extrapolate the current trend.
Every single comment page is either meme recycling, or a flame war. That's current digg. It didn't used to be like this. - Metalcard, on 08/22/2008, -4/+7Can you do something about the now constant duplicate stories hitting the front page?
- jimcherylhall, on 08/22/2008, -4/+7Can you change the tool 'Thread' to open the comment before the selected comment? Most times I want to see why the comment was made and you can't find this easily while looking at the most diggs list.
- sgtcaboose, on 08/23/2008, -0/+3Duplicate entries are still being created, perhaps a feature that will re-submit the article bringing it into upcoming again without it being added 12 times?
- Darkaged, on 08/22/2008, -7/+10I would like to see comment threads that can go deeper than 3.
- recruz, on 08/22/2008, -0/+3i think they want to- but with the way the screen is organized, it would make the comment box oddly shaped. so in order for them to do that, they will have to re-arrange the comment section ... to me, there's kind of a lot of empty space between the users' name and the start of the comment- but i certainly like this layout better than reddit- even though reddit can cram more comments and stories, it's just not aesthetically pleasing to me
- mikoyski, on 08/22/2008, -1/+4Yes, I know about the archive link, But I was thinking of maybe having a "This day in Digg" sort of thing. Something like what are being dugg same time last year or 2 years ago.
- WITFITS, on 08/25/2008, -0/+3True. Maybe the change has to be approved by the story submitter. It would give them a chance to correct any mistake or inaccuracy.
- GCarden, on 08/22/2008, -1/+4Sounds nice in theory, but I would be a little afraid of a potential "Bury Brigade" coming and changing a title from, e.g., "Politician So-and-So does something cool" to "Politician So-and-So is a snotty bag of boogers" or "This story is a dupe and sucks." There'd have to be safeguards of some sort for it to work.
- adrianscholl, on 08/22/2008, -2/+5In one of the previous town halls it was suggested that short messages could be written when sending a friend invite. What is the status on this feature?
- localhost6881, on 08/23/2008, -1/+4I'd love to have a 'block all shouts from this user' button. I might still want to go to their page to see what they submit, but only when i want to, I might also want to see shouts from others, and not be faced with 50 pages of shouts from one person. every day.
- mark076h, on 08/22/2008, -0/+3That's why they have the snorg tees ads
- sfrench, on 08/22/2008, -0/+2This isn't exactly what you are asking for, but we already do have an archive section that might be of interest to you.
http://digg.com/archive - WITFITS, on 08/25/2008, -0/+2Perhaps additional instructions should be given to the user as well on the submission page indicating that following a story to its source and digging that is more useful than digging someone else's 2nd or nth-party reporting on it.
- recruz, on 08/22/2008, -1/+3get out of here ... *****
- inactive, on 08/22/2008, -23/+25Why do you block users without letting them know the reason? We all signed up with an email address, and if somebody has been a member for, oh, say, 3 ***** years, has contributed a whole lot to the community, don't you think it would be the "nice" thing to do to at least tell them what they did wrong?
Also, would you mind addressing the concern about how digg is now a total piece of *****, and rather than fixing the concerns at hand, you are doing band-aid fixes on the hoover dam of all problems? Shouts should be eliminated in upcoming. Submitters should remain anonymous in upcoming. Submissions should not have their own URL's until they reach the front page. Find a way to change search results so that the system cannot be gamed that way. It would involve a complete site redevelopment, but if you implement ALL four of these (not just one, that won't work), then digg will ACTUALLY be the utopian submission factory that it SHOULD have been all along. Do all four of these things, and you will likely find that the "top users" don't hit the front page nearly as often, and it will come down to actual content. The recommendation system would ACTUALLY work then. People would ACTUALLY digg based on submission content. And this is only mentioning submissions, there is also the problems inherent in the commenting system. The design of the comment system PROMOTES the idiotic use of memes and other idiocy. Why post anonymously on 4chan if you can be CONGRATULATED on digg by getting your comment voted up astronomically? There are three factors at hand here:
1) a plush UI that shouts out loudly how many votes somebody has
2) showing the up AND down votes of a comment actually somewhat promotes being a ***** sometimes
3) font size, and horizontal padding: seems like a lame excuse, but digg internet comments look like a children's story book. You will rarely find novel-quality content written in size 16. Nobody wants to scroll to see a long, thought-out comment
4) threading: there should be no limit on threading, and vertical padding should be smaller, to promote conversations. Right now, people throw ***** at the wall and hope that it sticks
5) take away the "sort by most diggs" option, and put in a "popular" sorting, which is based on best ranked threads: this is one of the MANY reasons why reddit is far superior... good responses are rewarded as much as good comments... taking a look at a good thread is way better than looking at a good comment
6) speaking of "sort by most diggs", if I click on "show thread"... I want to see the actual ***** thread, not the top-rated comments in it. clicking on "show thread" should switch that thread (on the clickthrough) to being sorted by "oldest first", aka, threaded view. ***** stupid decision that was.
7) enough with the ***** web-2.0 styling. Yes, it "looks cool"... in the same way that Bandai and Mattel products "look cool." Stop it, and show me a mature interface. It is the same styling and effects that make the pages ***** slow to load.
8) allow text modifiers and "quoting" features in the comments that will make comments easier to read and understand. When used properly, it turns a long and inciteful comment into one that can actually be read. In fact, this one would be much easier.
9) when a URL is truncated in a digg comment, why the ***** did you put in a newline character after it? that totally breaks up the intended formatting of a comment.
10) if I digg down a comment, then block the user from the same comment, why can I no longer report the ***** comment? that is a retarded design flaw.
11) on the iPhone web-page interface for the comment section, I love that you can "see more comments." It is just too bad that when you click "see more comments" it actually brings up the first five again, before bringing you the new ones (try it out).
Some of the listed "current features" listed above sound like a great thing to have (ie. heavy GUI), but you really have to take into consideration both the user experience with it (ie. page load times?), and also the effect that it has on the comments, and the community in general (see #4)
Sure, you had your fun with the digg labs projects, but how about you spend some of your time taking away the fundamental flaws of your system first? Considering how I spent 3 ***** years of my high-school and college life numbing my mind with all the ***** that your system has let through the cracks and actually PROMOTED, I wonder how much smarter and more successful I would be now if I had been visiting reddit all that time. You have a ***** of traffic, which SHOULD be a benefit, considering how you have always promoted the fact that "the crowd" moderates itself. That is like saying a cow has free roam over its pasture (even though the pasture is 10'x10'. It is technically true, but you are not looking at the situation as a whole)
Check out the comments here to listen to the thoughts of those who have left digg in the past because of both the flaws and the community itself: http://www.reddit.com/comments/6x6ll/did_you_start ... and while you are at it, look at what a REAL comment section should be like. See how it isn't a flame war? See how users happen to be polite to each other, use intelligent grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation? The lack of a heavy graphical interface scares away plenty of ***** who prefer digg instead, but once you realize the benefits of EVERYTHING in their comment system, you never want to view a single digg comment section every again in your life. If you enjoy memes, stay on digg. You spill out a meme, sheeple digg you up as far as possible, and you actually get CONGRATULATED for reusing memes. Where did you put effort into your comment? nowhere. Copy and paste. Reddit is great for intelligent pun threads that actually require intelligence to both read AND understand. Far superior. Also, when somebody adds to the discussion, and people do not agree with their opinion, even if they are technically correct, they do not get voted down to oblivion. Discussion is discussion. Digg has become a cesspool of both bias and meme recycling. Reddit is where memes go to die. When something is old and stupid, it just doesn't get said or promoted. On digg, think of a meme or ASCII post as a submission repost... then you can see why soo many people loathe them. If you have found yourself posting in a digg comment thread with an intelligent comment, and you look around and see only idiot, go to reddit. If, however, you see everyone around you as on-par with your intellect, then by all memes (brilliant pun), stay here in your cesspool. Digg has become 4chan. It has been said many times before, but with the organizational structure of digg, and its audience, it is truly dangerous. And you know what? The branding of digg has become cool, popular, mainstream, and has for a while. With each of the small societal changes that the digg community has created on itself (every lolcat front page post, for example), you have brought in more people from other sites who share that own retarded view on 'digg' should be. Once my mother and little sister started going to digg, I knew for a FACT that digg had jumped the shark, and you should know that all these RE:RE:RE:RE: posts might ACTUALLY be posted by your mother or by the mother of somebody else. I am horrified to realize that absorbing all of this content has made a change inside myself. The point at which you look at the title of a digg submission, and you know EXACTLY what the first 10 comments are going to be, you understand automatically that you are more intelligent that 90% of the digg community, because they couldn't think of something to say that you had not. There has been an incredible lack of original content on digg. It is the same problem that has faced many websites, and is claimed by many to be the reason in why 4chan is and never will be what it used to be circa 2004-5. I fear for the future days of digg where huge raids go down both online and IRL for people who do not deserve it, or something that is completely unlawful, or something that is just plain stupid. I can see one year from now when some cam-whore who happens to be mentally handicapped reaches the front page. Submission: "Retard Live-Cam LOLOLOL Raid Tiem" and the 10 top-rated comments on digg happen to be "LAMP ON HEAD." If that ***** is something you would like to see on digg, then you should GTFO right now, and scope out a chan of your liking, because that is absolutely NOT what digg should be. If you are against the idea, then step back, and look at what digg is becoming, and ask yourself why you are doing nothing about it. File a complaint, and you too should GTFO, kindly. I am interested to see how long Kevin Rose will endorse the content of his own site. To what lengths will the idiocy goes until he finally throws in the towel and says ***** it. The dwindling amount of quality front-page stories is going to have an interesting effect on the diggnation shows, and I wonder how long it will take for them to not have a show. Maybe one week, there will be such a huge 4chan-like raid on digg that EVERY front page story for that week will be titled "***** ***** *****"[sic], and krose will have no choice but to not have diggnation that week. It may seem far fetched, I know, but the stupidity on the internets knows no bounds. I have already seen dozens of submissions in upcoming with that exact title. one of them, in fact, had 55 diggs, and I had to personally email the digg staff to get it removed off of their servers. I am not sure if those diggers got banned, but honestly, I got banned for something that I don't even know what I did, so I don't even really give a ***** anymore about what the digg staff is doing against all these idiots piling onto the site.
This is the death of digg. Even when all the suggestions above have been implemented, the community will still largely be the same, and will still promote the same dumb *****, and make the same dumb comments. Changing the features of the site will only be a way of guiding the community in promoting the content that THEY like, so it really comes down to a community problem! In that case... bail. Sounds retarded, but the digg community has gone sour and FUBAR. Go out and make a community framework, and start 3-10 separate sites based on that framework, with very different UI's, but the same basic concept. Unless you find some ingenious way to limit the site to one specific type of person (make the sites closed, perhaps. Login-required)... then those sites will become FUBAR at one point as well.
The same conversion has been happening on reddit as well... there has been an influx of less-than-intelligent users submitting, moderating, and commenting. I see it as being inevitable, if you have an open site. At one point, you have to start fresh, make a new site, only promote it on topic-specific forums, and just wait for the inevitable.
Every open, self-moderated site will turn into a chan or a youtube someday, without SERIOUS admin intervention. That is my opinion, and whether you agree or not doesn't really matter, because only time will tell. - Enron, on 08/22/2008, -3/+5I call for the formation of a militia at the town hall.
- bouche, on 11/13/2008, -0/+2weird dude. That's very much related to what I just typed below you. there must be a better way to identify duplicate content. They should be brought forward again if they really are worthy of a revisit.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 124 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