digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Gaming Digg / New Changes

diggtheblog.blogspot.com — "Over the last (almost) two years we have learned a lot about the user base and how to defend digg from spam, artificial diggs, and digg fraud. It's a battle we will continue to fight and one that we don't take lightly."

Who dugg this? Made popular Sep 6, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

312 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Schug, on 10/12/2007, -20/+207Now you can all stop complaining! Believe it or not he's actually doing something.
  • 3monkeys, on 10/12/2007, -49/+208Thanks Kevin. I guess I'll have to continue gaming the system as I have, submitting unique stories with quality content.
  • robbh66, on 10/12/2007, -13/+95For the love of god get off that cross.

    Don't sit here and cry about being thrown to the wayside when you in fact are part of the problem. Thirteen thousand, yes THIRTEEN THOUSAND stories dugg by you. Are you going to claim you read each and everyone of them in seven short months? No, you didn't. You dugg them because those were stories from people on your friend's list.

    You're part of the problem, not the solution, and at the first sign of real trouble you ran out so you could go out on top. Your cronies might be sad to see you go along with a couple of brown noses who actually think being a top digger means *****. For the most part, however, you'll be forgotten by next week.

    And you know what? It'll be a better place without you.
  • misterpony, on 10/12/2007, -7/+86Oh the irony. Everyone is digging Kevin's submission and not the other one.
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -31/+110You know what I get tired of? Submitting stories and working my ass off to make digg something cool and getting lumped into a category called "circle jerk". I submit stories that I think are cool. I get up at 5AM PST every morning to do this. I digg stories that I think are cool. The fact that people are on my friends list have dugg the same story, will sometimes influence me to check the story out and digg it for later reading.

    I feel as if I've busted my ass here on digg and all I get is a lousy t-shirt that says "digg circle jerk". Once again, mod me down for having an opinion that differs from yours, but it's the way I feel.

    Peace out..
  • p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, on 10/12/2007, -94/+162Dear Mr. Rose: So all of a sudden, my use of the BUILT-IN functionality of Digg amounts to gaming?

    I ignored Digg's ice-cold level of support during the Netscape transition. Instead I stayed with Digg - for nothing.
    I ignored Jay's jack-ass condescending T-Shirt comment.
    I ignored the misbegotten algorithm you all put in place shortly after that that made it MISERABLY hard for any user to get to the front page (which is a big factor in this whole issue)
    I overlooked all the red ink about I/we were FOOLS to digg so hard for you - the 60 Million Dollar Man.
    I overlooked the Trademark fiasco and the treatment of Digg's users
    I overlooked this: http://digg.com/music/EMI_in_free_music_downloads_deal and
    But I will NOT overlook your tacit equation of BUSTING MY ASS for Digg with gaming.

    As a direct result of your blog this evening. I will no longer no supporting Digg going forward. I bequeath my measly number one position to whoever wants to reign.

    And for all of you that do nothing but bitch about your being PREVENTED from getting your stories dugg - here's your chance! Now YOU can spend all the time, all the effort and get stabbed in the back by fellow Diggers (aptly named) and then tossed to the side by a Digg team that values toilet paper with more worth than the core users that feed this site it's content every day.

    I believe you to be a good man, Kevin. Well intentioned or not: your blog satisfied malcontents equipped with baseless allegations while you effectively urinated on your top diggers (correction: top gamers). I wish you well. I will be turning over the Digg Users Support Group to someone else.

    To my many friends - I will miss you.
    P9
  • ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -8/+75The system which allowed you and your friends to dominate Digg also left an open hole to those who would use Digg for self promotion and gain via unethical means. You really come across like your pissed that your group may no longer be able to reign the top spots by simply acting en masse. The adjustment Kevin proposes shouldn't bother you one bit if the quality of your submissions warrants front page attention rather than the number and quickness of your groups Diggs. You really are giving the accusations made against your group a ton of credibility with that rant you just made and when groups like the "Libertarian Diggers" formed a mailing list to mass Digg submissions and gain front page status you had to know this adjustment was coming. Anyway, I expect if an investigation is made deeper into this groups history we will most likely find the goal had more to do with promoting individuals personal sites than "working hard for Digg". Forgive me for doubting you and your friend's altruism on this one.
  • Obsydian, on 10/12/2007, -6/+72No offense to a great contributor, but your logic in this matter is just... off. This "gaming" or whatever you call it, it isn't an insult. If a trend is noticed where people's friends are digging their stories right to the front page, that's just wrong, and it needs to be fixed. It's the kinda ***** that happens in lawmaking, where a committee members "friends" all get this crap bill on the floor, because the guy who wrote it got lobbied. Of course here it's easier to fix, so Kevin did it.

    Also, as far as "busting your ass" goes, that's just hilarious to me. You're in front of a computer, submitting stories. I'm not saying it's easy, but no one is making you "bust your ass" except yourself. Likewise, if you make the decision to leave it is yours, but why not just leave? Instead you slam the door on the way out.
  • daborg, on 10/12/2007, -12/+66@p9s50W5k4GUD2c6: HAHAHAHA! Oh my God...

    "Dear Mr. Rose: So all of a sudden, my use of the BUILT-IN functionality of Digg amounts to gaming?"

    Um, YEAH? Why do you think they're CHANGING that built-in functionality?

    Sheesh you sound like a child having a tantrum because their candy was taken away. Get a life, or find some other way to feed your starving self-esteem with empty attention.

    Digg is meant to be democratic, it's mean to be controlled by the masses, NOT by you.

    Get over it.
  • MikeCerm, on 10/12/2007, -5/+58Now if we could only get a "Top Commentors" tab, where the most prolific and popular commentors are given credit and exposure. It's the comments and discussion that keep people coming to Digg, not the stories.
  • tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -3/+55p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, I think you need to realise that none of what has been said the past few days has been an attack on the top users, but rather the system that allows you to get there.

    Having said that, reading your goodbye message, the language you've used shows it's clear you view yourself as more important than everyone else. Like you should be owed something for sticking around. That you're a core user (perhaps with the implication that it's a more important position than a casual user).

    I believe that in digg, no-one should be more important than anyone else, period. In making some people more important than others, there is an inherent bias (in either direction) in the stories that will be dugg, and that cannot be allowed to happen in a system like this. If you stories were worthy of the FP on their own merits, that's great (and don't get me wrong, I completely realise you only got where you are by submitting quality stories to start with). But as you work your way up the ranking, your submitted stories start getting influenced regardless of the merits of that story. That's not your fault. It's an inherent fault with Digg. You said it yourself: "Top diggers". There should not BE 'top diggers'.

    I don't think Kevin was attacking anyone, but rather acknowleding the Digg system has built-in bias to top users, and therefore muddies the submission process.

    You know, I'd like you to stick around. But what I'd like you to do is register a new username, and not make anyone aware of it, and see how the submission process works when you submit your usual quantity of stories, but under an 'untarnished' username. I think it'd be a good experiment to see just what influence a top-user circle of friends has on stories (though let's face it, we know the answer or we wouldn't be here in this digg now).

    The simple solution to this whole mess is for Digg to completely ditch the whole idea of ranking users. It's clear to see what sort of feeling it is generating in the community. It has to go.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+59"I ignored the misbegotten algorithm you all put in place shortly after that that made it MISERABLY hard for any user to get to the front page (which is a big factor in this whole issue)"

    That is the whole point. You should not be concerned about whether your story makes it to the front page or not. It DOES NOT MATTER. Submit the content and let the community decide. Your job is done.

    Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
  • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -10/+60"Don't forget, "and keep auto-digging my select circle of friends"."

    You can digg down my comment if you want, but no one was *ever* accusing these guys of not submitting quality stories. The issue came down to their practice of insta-digging each other's submissions.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -27/+75Indeed what a prime example of how Digg is *****. Digg me down and deffend him all you guys want but it needs work. If this right here isn't proof enough, what is?
  • fugazi, on 10/12/2007, -8/+56The top digger in my mind - http://digg.com/users/infonote/dugg
  • gweedo767, on 10/12/2007, -8/+54I find the real irony/oddness to be that Kevin's entry is a TRUE dupe. The URL's in the two stories are spot on the same and the other guys is 2 minutes older. I guess being the king lets you get around your systems build in dupe checking :)
  • carlosglz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+47I don't think we need the top users here... they should all leave. The point of digg is the contribution by many, not a few. If not it is just like all the other news outlets. As a matter of fact, the ratings system should be eliminated entirely, it's stupid high school *****...
  • NinjAlt, on 10/12/2007, -24/+63Bye *****. Dont come back :-)
  • mobilehavoc, on 10/12/2007, -14/+52Leaving = create a new username profile and continue the gaming..
  • Lorian, on 10/12/2007, -9/+47People always digg down dupe comments...

    Nobody gives a crap. They just digg the one they see.
  • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+42Geez.. I feel bad for that guy. All the stories he's submitted, and not a single promotion.
  • kbarrett, on 10/12/2007, -6/+38Whew! Now I can stop obsessing about Digg and go back to digging. I'm looking forward to the new changes. I think it will result in a higher quality and diversity of content.

    Yay, Digg.
  • zombo, on 10/12/2007, -18/+49Not a bad post for spam bot.
  • epilonious, on 10/12/2007, -2/+31"In Internet jargon, there is a phenomenon known as "flouncing." The flouncer is never content to simply leave a message board or discussion forum he finds disagreeable; he must conspicuously announce that he is leaving, detail the inadequacies of the other posters, bemoan the cruel treatment he has received, and, likely as not, sneak back to check the reactions to his flounce. Usually these reactions boil down to 'Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.' " - Poppy Z. Brite.

    We have contacted Whine One One and a Whambulance has been dispatched to your location with a jumbo pacifier.

    Otherwise, tyoodloo.
  • chad78, on 10/12/2007, -8/+37I'm not a top 30. (I am a top 50, but no one is complaining about me ... yet.) So as an outsider to this little *ahem* "top 30 circle jerk" (I did not make that up) I must say ... Who cares? You know, if 30 or 20 or 50 or 90 people want to digg each other's stories - let them. I digg my friend's stories. I also report my friends as inaccurate when need be. I also ignore some of their stories. Am I more prone to digg stories from my friends? Of course. But I also scan the upcoming stories as well. I think if more of the bitchers would start doing *that* (scan the upcomings) they'd (a) see that the top 30 submit more stories than the vast majority (b) see that the top 30's stories are better - (better quality and better titles/descriptions) - than most other stories and (c) START HAVING MORE CONTROL OF WHAT'S ON THE FRONT PAGE. You don't control what's on the front page by only reading / digging front page stories. You don't control the front page by just doing that and submitting a few stories and then bitching when it doesn't get to the front page. You have to digg non-front-page stories.

    I'm submitting this comment to all the stories about this garbage.
  • buzzbeebara, on 10/12/2007, -4/+32Hey, at least Kevin uses his own site. Do you think Murdoch uses MySpace the same way the teenie boppers do? Kudos to Kevin for continuing to refine Digg and keeping it useful/fun for the rest of us.
  • lazydrumhead, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33the submissions are TWO minutes apart. and one is by the chief architect of the website. articles with more relevant submitters are not a bad thing to promote. and good story titles are easier to digg, too.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -34/+62p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, supernova17, tlmac59, 3monkeys, digitalgopher, BloodJunkie, Aidenag, johndi, hemphill81, aaaz, wayjer, Geekforlife, illegalchuck, gwjc

    Stop the digg-circle or someone please ban their asses.
  • Kericr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28@Whitey: "2nd: Any secret algorithm is a bum deal. In case you haven't noticed Digg users are pretty pro-open source. Release the algorithm. It will be beaten by spammers, but with every iteration it will get better."

    He tried this once. Remember "25 diggs in 24 hours promotes a story?" That ended up not working out too well.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+37stop submitting cheap stories that don't mean anything to no one. I have seen a few of the top dig users getting and keeping a front page story but only get 10 or so comments. that means it isn't interesting to people. also read your descriptions! don't use "we" or "I" when you are not the author of the story then maybe you wont come off as a profiteer of this business
  • gwjc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27@diggywiggit:

    Dude, you've never even submitted anything and you've only been registered for about two weeks; maybe hang around for a while and get a feel for how this place works then you can start telling everyone how to run it. I don't understand why you think any of us should be banned; We aren't putting penis enlargement or discount viagra ads on the frontpage; We're investing a lot of time, for free, digging good content up, because we like digg. Anyway dude, I've complained about aspects of digg many times in the past and I won't hold your gripes against you, welcome aboard!

    Good name by the way!
  • robbh66, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29"I'm surprised you people aren't bitching at what supernova17 had to say. He's another one abusing the system."

    Thank you for pointing this out and allowing me the opportunity to rip into him.

    Supernova, how intelligent of you to equate the top 30 users to all of digg's content. What moronic fools we are to bite the hand that feeds us... Except, there's only one problem:

    You're not the only hand that feeds us, and the other hands don't force-feed us.

    Their are plenty of people to pick up your slack. In case you've never noticed, there's typically 3500-4000 stories in the que at any given time. Guess what? Many of those stories are the same ones you guys submitt. Yes, we might miss a good story here or there, but then again, we wont be bombarded by some of the absolute dregs that make it to the front page because of a Top30 user's name alone. More importantly, such dribble won't quickly bury better, more deserving, stories out of the first few pages such has been the case with the explosion of front page stories with digg v3.

    I promise you, not only will we be fine without you and the other top 29, we'll be better for it.
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -11/+34@dclowd9901

    Accusing me of "bootstrapping" with others is not only asinine, it's ***** irresponsible. If you pride yourself on reading every article you digg, how about priding yourself on reading what I've actually dugg before you blindly assume I'm part of some big ***** conspiracy.

    You also blindly assume that I submit stories just to end up in the "top". I've already ***** explained that I get up early to submit stories that I think are interesting. At most I submit perhaps 10 in the morning and maybe that same amount in the evening.

    I don't have a "poor me" attitude. I have a pissed off attitude at people like you who assume that I'm up to something nefarious, simply because I'm in the top 30. I'm also pissed off that you're in here telling me what digg is to me and why I do what I do. Who the ***** are you to do that?
  • Roguecop, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25I pulled this quote from the EMI thread...

    "You obviously have! You've realized your power and abused it, to bury stories based on the submitter, rather than the quality of the content. You think you are solving a problem with the system, but you are only progressively exacerbating it, through unjustifiable manipulation of your power as a digg user."

    My concern is with 'BURY' and 'power as a digg user'. Do people with more power rating in the system have a greater digg down impact on stories? Can these people alone actually kill stories or at least badly damage them in route to the front page? If so this algorithm is terribly, terribly flawed. If not and powerful friends groups are engaged in this misconduct of mass burying then this algorithm is still terribly, terribly flawed. If people are really being bullied off the front page, that obviously needs to change presently, otherwise Digg is something other than what it claims to be.

    Perhaps Digg the democracy is dealing with its own little version of organized crime.
  • jsp317, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22I love digg. I try to read posted stories and digg the ones i find use full or interesting. I can't do it every day. I work. I have submitted a few. I have no friends on digg. Don't really want any. I post what i think is use full. I got 9 diggs on one. I was happy 9 people dugg it. It didn't make the front page i don't care. 9 people found a cool tool to use. well i found another cool tool. I'm gonna post it now.
  • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25The other thing that gets me is that, Kevin mentions that we can mark a story as bad, and that helps regulate the system, but it seems like those stories never get pulled off the front page whenever they meet the threshold for bad/inaccurate. They just hang out up there on the front page.

    And this still doesn't prevent people from digging each other's stories up. I guess I'll just have to wait til the new algorithm comes out before I start submitting again.
  • NinjAlt, on 10/12/2007, -7/+26I'm surprised you people arent bitching at what supernova17 had to say. He's another one abusing the system. Look at this lovely quote from him.

    "If top 30 users were not on digg for a week, hell even a day, there would be no content at all."

    He's another one of the super-ego's. He should be ripped a new one too.
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -12/+31@whitey04

    I appreciate the sentiment bro. However, dclowd9901 lumped me into the "circle jerk" category in another thread. People will mod my comments down simply because they come from me. Others have admitted to digging any story that I submit down, simply because I'm in the top 30. It goes both ways...frustrations on all levels I'm afraid..
  • Whitey04, on 10/12/2007, -35/+531st: Awesome that digg is responding. Top diggers is great! We need more people digging/burying in the upcoming than submitting.

    2nd: Any secret algorithm is a bum deal. In case you haven't noticed Digg users are pretty pro-open source. Release the algorithm. It will be beaten by spammers, but with every iteration it will get better.

    Otherwise we are left with spammers beating the system anyway, but with powerless users and slow response to spamming tactics.
  • boneill428, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23What a whiney bitch.
    Hey P9. By leaving digg it shows guilt. Whether you are guilty of "gaming" or not. I think it would have been a much better move if you stayed at digg and proved through this new algorithm that you are still going to be the top digger. Then it would prove to everybody how quality your articles really are.

    But it looks like you are just going to give up.
  • canewediggit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19word. good to see the system does work. props to jesusfreak for making the big push today that brought this issue to the fore. double for digg staff in addressing it.
  • Kericr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I was going to say that this still needs to be defeated. KR could submit a story about how the power of corrugated cardboard and it'll get dugg to the front page, and it's not just his submissions, anything he comments on will get dugg up, without exception (that means it includes comments where he notes he's reporting the story).
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20@nonpopularuser

    Wow, you've surmised all of that after being registered for about a week huh? You've submitted 3 stories in that week. Good on ya. Keep going. Don't let the fact that the 3 stories that you've submitted haven't front paged. Keep submitting quality stuff and you will make it to the front page (although this isn't what it's about to me) eventually.

    That being said, that submission of mine that you've pointed to was a humorous submission....wholly different than your tech submission. I did read it and submitted because it made me chuckle. It apparently made a few others chuckle because they dugg it. So comparing these 2 submissions together really doesn't work because one is in "offbeat news" and the other is in "hardware".

    That being said, your sarcastic tone isn't lost on me but because you're new here, I'll let it go.

    Peace out..
  • ZaNkY, on 10/12/2007, -9/+26Hey GregD, you're cool (I friended you ^_^), don't worry about it.

    Also, I don't believe that there is anything that Kevin can do to change this. Where ever there is a list, there will always be a top and a bottom. Especially a top X (100 in this case) and a bottom rest.

    If Kevin ran the code through trillions of dollars worth of programming and "quality assurance" and Supercomputers, in the end Digg would still be the same. There would still be a top group, although it might be a different group.

    Personally I'm working my ass off trying to get up to the top 100, submitting quality links and news. It's hard, and I'll admit having lots of friends does help. However, I don't think that the Top 100 should have their Diggs or buries worth more, or for that matter, NO ONE should have more power. For Digg to work perfectly everyone needs to be equal. That's not the case. Some people have made lots of friends on Digg or brought lots of friends into Digg, some are friendless (on Digg). Some spend hours a day scouring the Internet for items to submit while others spend 2 minutes a day checking the headlines on Digg.

    Digg is a dynamic system, that's what makes it work and keeps it going. The more "work" you put into it, the more you get back out. True it's not perfect, and some people may be taking advantage of it, although I don't believe it intentional. I know many top 100 users, and they're not here to game some random website. They're good at what they do, and they repay loyalty. You Digg mine, I'll read your submits and digg the ones I like. It's human courtesy. (remember: "you digg mine" assumes that you read my article and liked it, so I'll give YOU a chance and read some of YOUR articles. That's the point of Friends. Back me up Kevin).

    I would also like to Thank the ENTIRE Digg Development team, not just Kevin, for continually putting more time into Digg, and making adjustments where needed, ESPECIALLY as quick as this, right after the complaints lodged and voiced.

    Thanks Digg Team:
    Thanks Amar Nadhir, Thanks Owen Byrne, Thanks Steve Williams, Thanks Nicole Williams, Thanks Eli White, Thanks Timeless, Thanks Daniel Burka, Thanks Kevin Rose, Thanks Ron Gorodetzky, Thanks Brian Link, Thanks Mike Newton, Thanks Dan Huard, Thanks Jay Adelson, Thanks John Moffett, and Thanks Scott Baker. You guys work hard for us, and I appreciate you guys.
  • Whitey04, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25@Greg D

    I don't lump you in with the top20 or circle jerks. You can tell that you care because of your comments, and your care that opinons get heard even if disagreed with.

    You've done good work.

    There are others however, that work the system, have too much power, and submit crap (making digg crap) and get off scott free.
  • dragongrrl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17
    kevinrose said vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
    a key update is coming soon. This algorithm update will look at the unique digging diversity of the individuals digging the story. Users that follow a gaming pattern will have less promotion weight. This doesn't mean that the story won't be promoted, it just means that a more diverse pool of individuals will be need to deem the story homepage-worthy.

    ...

    This list will also be sorted by how diverse the digger is - meaning if they digg stories from lots of different people and their stories become popular, they'll rank highly.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    i'd like to see some way to work comments into the algorithm to somehow weight a user's ranking based on their comments and the digg score of those comments. if that's in there already, i'd really appreciate a clarification.

    if you take time to comment on stories and your comments are deemed useful, that should count for *something*. maybe more than just clicking on "digg it" links...
  • ArmyOfFun, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Agreed. There are problems with digg, but at least Kevin is responding to user input. Most websites deal with complaints in a few limited ways:
    - Ignore them.
    - Acknowledge them but do nothing about them.
    - Ban anyone who brings them up, remove any trace of the complaints.

    Kevin's response is a breath of fresh air, at least in this instance. I'm sure there will still be complaints that get ignored or aren't addressed, but you can't please everyone.
  • Gregd, on 10/12/2007, -11/+27And as for your power comment. I don't come here for the power. Since your ability to research anything that you accuse people of is limited, I'll remind you of something.

    Back in November of 2005, I started a site called diggfan.com. I didn't have any advertising on it and merely started it as a place for diggers to meet up and talk about digg or anything else. This was prior to the commenting system we have now and during the "koolaidguy" saga if you remember that. It was out of my site that I befriended a guy named Ash. He made this awesome firefox extension where you could block users, block stories by keywords, etc., all on digg. I thought it worked wonderfully and certainly increased the functionality (at that time) of digg tremendously. A LOT of people downloaded it and used it and thought it worked great. It was my contribution to the digg "community" such that it is.

    Why am I telling you this? Because I am truly here as a digger. I have yet to see this "power" that you speak of.
  • capn_caveman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22I think digg has to be very careful about the way they implement this algorithm change. If you read a lot of the comments on this page and on many of the related submissions, well there are a lot of people around here that seem to resent the top submitters of digg for having an undue amount of influence on the website. I've read several comments in several threads about people saying that they mark every submission from top submitters as "lame" or whatever. So it is logical that people purposely NOT digg an article just because it was submitted from P9, digitalgopher, gwjc, etc. Implementing an algorithm to force story promotion by diversified digging may actually penalize these users because many people have a tendency to not digg them in the first place. I'm all for diversified digging, but digg has to be careful to try to keep a level playing field and not actually exclude top users from making the front page.
  • jayadelson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17We are always watching.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 314 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
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.