What is Digg?219 Comments
- nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -10/+575"So anybody taking bets on how soon this one will get buried?"
If you're interested in burying this story, I'll sell you my "bury" vote for $0.50 . . . we're having a half off sale. - arof, on 10/12/2007, -4/+117The digg that the author bought diggs for: http://www.digg.com/design/Why_are_people_fascinated_by_photographs_of_crowds
- Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -6/+92Why not add Ubuntu to the title? And top it off with a little bit of Steve Jobs in the description?
- gamasutra, on 10/12/2007, -7/+90Crowds are fascinating. Why study a person when you can study a crowd?
- randf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+80so now will we see "buy this digg" tags at the bottom of future news stories?
- btipling, on 10/12/2007, -9/+87"When we identify a (Digg user) who is part of a scam, we don't remove their account so they don't realize they've been identified. Then we let them continue voting, but their votes may count a lot less. Then the scam doesn't work."
-what if the algorithm is wrong and an innocent person has been identified as a scammer incorrectly? What then? Said person just roams around in ignorance? This is a ***** up policy. - ajaydsouza, on 10/12/2007, -4/+78Considering that the story landed up on the front page, it clearly shows how Digg could be manipulated.
It is good though that the Digg community ensured it didn't last for long, but where was the bury brigade when it was needed the most? - arnar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+71Dugg.. for $0.5
- alteratti, on 10/12/2007, -4/+65$1, huh
I'd rather join a construction company who'd pay me more for digging.. - roomforpanic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+59@sarevok9
Just curious, what do GoDaddy domains "look" like? You know, in case I need to identify one in the wild. - wizbor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+47Whats even more interesting is the Wired story that DID get buried, "Hunting Down Digg's Bury Brigade" http://www.wired.com/news/technology/internet/0,72835-0.html
If the article is correct I risk losing my account here just posting this. We shall see. - Yorn, on 10/12/2007, -6/+38I find it funny people talk about a "bury brigade". Hi, nice to meet you, *I* am the bury brigade. I regularly bury stories, and rarely digg stories. Some of the crud that gets to the front page is just plain ridiculous, and it warms my heart to finally hear the SEO whiners complaining about it.
There should not be a crowd mentality where if something hits the front page it goes higher and higher, instead, front page stories should be HIGHLY scrutinized. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33If you do not *regularly* bury a large number of stories from the front page, you're not contributing to this site in any meaningful way.
In general, there is a lot more worthless crap on the front page than there is stuff you'd digg, and a lot of it does not elicit an indifferent reaction that would make people simply ignore the story. No no, on the contrary, many of these submissions are just AWFUL, as in "why-the-hell-did-anyone-ever-digg-this" awful. If you choose to then just ignore such a story and not bury it, that's a complete waste right there.
Please, please bury more stories. And bury more bad comments as well. There are a lot of gems on Digg, a lot of great submissions and a lot of great commenters that just get swallowed up by the masses. This is why plenty of outside communities (specifically Reddit, but to a lesser degree also Slashdot and Fark) routinely make fun of Digg -- and their mockery is JUSTIFIED primary because garbage is seldom ever buried here, and it just stays up and stinks up the whole place, making everything else look worse than it really is. - t-readyroc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29A blog about crowd photos that's an under-handed scheme to manipulate crowds? The ironing is delicious.
- arnar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+30Uhh.. if getting to the frontpage helps you sell $1000 worth of some product, spending $100 dollars doesn't sound that desperate.
- Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24What's that? Money can sway public opinion? Wow, better not tell any of the presidential candidates that, or there will certainly be trouble.
- undergrace, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25Man, and I've been wasting all this time looking for stories that might actually interest people!
It's good to see the "buy your friends" college fraternity mentality can be overtaken by the legitimate Digg community. Otherwise, nothing I submit would *ever* be dugg... I don't have that kind of disposable income! - crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Not exactly. He's already shown how people will go along with the crowd. What if his idea wasn't boneheaded? What if it was really cleverly designed spam that might not get dugg on its own? Or some random uninteresting product that wouldn't get dugg, but isn't necessarily all that lame?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17imho, digg needs to stop publishing any user rankings, "top users", and kill the "friend" system.
if that is done, people will *actually* read the "Upcoming stories" section and vote on things they find good, and newbies who are good will have a chance to get their stories to the front page. That would create a true democracy and a chance for everyone; I find it hopeless right now to get something to the front page even if I try, because the "Upcoming" section doesn't actually get read much.
If digg becomes a true democracy like the above, the selling-diggs problem may also be rectified because it wouldn't be impossible and necessary for anyone to resort to these techniques to get something to the front page - all they'd need is a good story - not good story AND racked up popularity. - spudnic, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22The fact they sucked was kind of the point
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Annalee Newitz (the Wired writer) is a woman. Not a guy.
- twistymcgee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Yeah but the point is that 172 people from the digg community dugg the story. So what does that say about the community.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19It's nice to see that Digg is broken again.
Of course it would be too obvious to do upgrades/maintenance in the middle of the night (U.S. since that is where the majority of Digg users are located) as opposed to the high traffic times. - profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16If by "delicious" you mean "tastes like burning", then absolutely.
- Huitz, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21"ironing"??
- OriginalLucid1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19"legitimate Digg community."
HA. Digg is gamed, top to bottom every day! - Zzyw, on 10/12/2007, -6/+18That may have had to do with the fact that 75% of Americans _aren't_ completely retarded. A small, fanatical group of diggers will occasionally get crummy conspiracy stories to the front page, where they get buried en masse by people with brains who are sick of that crap. It's spam, it's old, it's inaccurate and so lame I'll gladly bury every single one of them, free of charge.
- strictly, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17reddit, huh? I wonder if the censor the truth like Digg does.
- hansi001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I hope this makes it to Diggnation!!!
- ABadInAlbany, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Limited "studies", or at least analysis of traffic, have also shown that Digg traffic is a lot less sticky then traffic from Slashdot or techcrunch or other sites with users who have less of an ADD issue.
- metafore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9why? http://www.google.com/adsense/
that might also answer your "why do submitters link to their blogs instead of directly to the story" question you were about to ask. - lala, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Getting to the front page can earn you alot of money, you know..
- thejokker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10this isint the story that was paid for. If you read the article, the writer explains how he manipulated digg and submitted a story a few days ago.
- TheAbsintheHare, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Possibly.
Wired's parent company also owns Reddit, which is Digg's rival.
If Wired instills enough insecurity over Digg's mechanics... They're helping Reddit, and most likely making a nice bonus check. - aaronm67, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9This doesn't really have anything to do with the story, just your comment.
I'm not in a fraternity, but I know a lot of people who are. Honestly, they don't buy their friends. It's a bunch of people who don't know anybody who are looking to meet a bunch of people. At my school, living in the dorms, most people still go hang out with their friends from high school. Fraternities draw people who are looking to meet a lot of new people. Also, you can't really say they "buy their friends." Fraternities typically charge about $50 a month membership dues (if you're not living in the house, if you live in the house it will be much more expensive obviously), but that $50 a month gets you meals at the house, parties, and most houses usually do a few philanthropies too.
It just annoys me when people say they "buy their friends." It's just a bunch of people who are looking to meet a whole bunch of new people, and are usually pretty open about meeting new people. - neotype, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Lurkers do a big part in burying a horrible story. A very good commentator can sway everyones opinion though.
- IHaveIssues, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8It's in Wired. Think there's a big conspiracy?
- IHaveIssues, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Dugg because the article contains a link on info on the Bury Brigade.
- tom6a, on 10/12/2007, -11/+19"Ultimately, however, my story did get buried. If you search for it on Digg, you won't find it unless you check the box that says "also search for buried stories." This didn't happen because the Digg operators have brilliant algorithms, however -- it happened because many people in the Digg community recognized that my blog was stupid. Despite the fact that it was rapidly becoming popular, many commenters questioned my story's legitimacy. Digg's system works only so long as the crowds on Digg can be trusted."
It happened because people recognized that your blog was stupid AND because of digg's algorithms. - chadtatro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10not surprising at all.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10LGF gets buried for the same reason an article from godhatesfags.com or stormfront.org would get buried. That, and they tell their members to make multiple accounts to digg their stories to the front page. Digg doesn't like people that cheat the system and Digg definitely doesn't like hate cults. There's no "omgomgliberalconspiracy" involved.
- dreamtenstudios, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Did anyone actually check out the blog he made. It is hilarious... I would've dug the blog purely for it's humor.
http://www.crowdhacking.com/blog/
"This is a small crowd, but very packed. A packed crowd has the same properties a very large one, I think."
"I like this crowd because the light makes everybody look very symmetrical."
"I've been thinking about what makes a crowd fun to look at. Some people might say moving all together."
"A herd is like a crowd, except it's animals not people."
"I like this picture of a herd, taken by orbit_77, because there are a lot of bison kicking up dust. They almost seem like people at a dance club, with some at the "watering hole" and some on the dance floor!"
so ridiculous it's actually funny - spencer911, on 10/12/2007, -1/+81 $ per digg is a rip off just outsource it via indian call centres and you will get 1 cent per digg :D
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13This article is hilarious.
"After four and a half hours, I had 19 diggs." Bwahaha.
Why pay for diggs, be part of community and they will reward you. - bradbaxter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8But all DIGG has to do now is have someone sign-up as a "clicker" to see all the articles submitted to this service... and then give each submitter (for those articles) the Scarlet D.
- crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7companies have a long history of not giving attention to anything that remotely makes them look bad.
- bobothn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It is not digg that censors you it is the digg users that bury your story. If you dont like the fact that people can bury you for posting lame stupid stories or spam on digg then leave
- GRTWHT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The story here isn't the method, it's the fact that it worked - now think about all of the 'top diggers' and their circle of friends that insure that they are always dugg no matter what drivel it is they are posting.
The problem is that the system CAN be gamed, not the method of gaming it.
For anyone that doubts this, go right now and look at the upcoming stories, pick one that seems very interesting and promising as a front page story, but has been submitted by someone you have never heard of before. I'm willing to bet that by this time tomorrow that story will be front page, but that it will have been submitted by someone that has been on the frontpage with another story within the last 3 days....test it for yourself. - blake10, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8why were you banned?
- avoidance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Check out this article at Techcrunch.com. Remember that Wired is owned by the same company that owns Digg competitor Reddit.
http://digg.com/tech_news/TechCrunch_response_to_Wired_s_I_Paid_For_a_Story_On_Digg -
Show 51 - 100 of 211 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is