digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Jason Calacanis Responds to Kevin Rose' Diggnation Smack-Down

calacanis.com — "This is a serious discussion and I'm saddened that Kevin has reduced it to personal attacks. At the very least he could have a serious discussion about it *AFTER* he attacks me."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • joshpeek, on 10/12/2007, -8/+38Calacanis needs to quit his bitching.
    • chrisbtig, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12It's crap like this that make me realize this whole paying users controversy is merely a marketing ploy by Calacanis to get people to talk about Netscape. He's practically begging Keving to start a fight... it's the only way he knows how to drive traffic.
    • chesterjosiah, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8Notice joshpeek is ranked 150.

      I think Jason is right. Why doesn't Kevin share his MILLIONS that he's accrued? Why did he resort to personal attacks as opposed to actually debating the point at hand?

      Prediction: This will get dugg down.
    • titlesaysitall, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5I don't know who is more of an ass Jason Calacanis or Jason Calacanis, hard to pick.
    • mc7winkie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14He also needs to stop claiming that he and Kevin are "Brothers in arms." He totally tried to (forgive me) diss Digg and the fact that there are dedicated people who make it an awesome place.
  • roxtar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I'm not so sure he's (entirely) bitching. He makes some valid points. If this does sell, the money's most likely not going to be distributed evenly over the top 50 users. If those who post a lot can get some money, why not, well, get some money?

    Another prediction: This'll get dugg down...
    • cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Here's the problem for those who've missed it. His points are NOT valid, they're corrosive gas or a corporate disease to spread amongst the indigenous peoples in clearing the land. Digg users aren't "entitled" to be paid for stories, anymore than Alexa users are entitled to be paid for having the toolbar installed on their machines or Hitbox users are entitled to be paid for putting the counter on their pages.

      That C-man wants to do so is his prerogative, but to all the chess players out there, it reeks of "ploy". You can go down the points like 1.) Is Calcanis only counting front page stories (as his linked article suggests)? Is this model an equilibrium and not an equation (remove members and existing/new members step in of similar caliber and contribution)? --But in the end, this "discussion" is *toxic*, irrelevant, and highly Machiavellian.

      Who care what Calcanis believes... Why? Because talking up this notion could be both disingenuous AND helpful to his long-term plans. That's not a reasonable thing argue with when the "other side" simply benefits from promulgating the importance of a heretofore non-issue. It's like the politician smilingly asking his opponent how often he beats his wife, and then proceeding to make the denial more and more questionable simply by finding more people to talk about it. He then goes about creating an "I Don't Beat My Wife" club and wondering publically why his opponent hasn't joined. In this example, we begin talking about a imaginary "robbery" that did not, is not, will not occur as if it has and continues to happen.

      Talk about the "valid" points? Mm. Pass. They're both obvious and irrelevant.
    • ragingbull831, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2It is a load of BS PR. Did Calacanis "SHARE THE WEALTH" with his top bloggers when he sold weblogs inc. for millions?
    • GoMe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yes, he did pay all his bloggers fairly well.
  • jdawg, on 10/12/2007, -10/+11I think Kevin's a great guy, and I'm obviously a huge fan of DIGG and how far it has come in such a short period of time.

    However, I have some different views of the space than Kevin and we should be able to discuss them without getting so personal. If he wants it to be personal that's fine, but this is a serious debate with big implications. I'd really like him to engage it on a serious level.

    Should the top 50 get paid? Should they have upside?

    Should there be "Anchors" or people providing extra context like we do on Netscape?

    Where is all this heading?
    • thedove, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11jason, you just have the WRONG approach. Why are you "slapping your netscape users in the face" by ignoring them and paying users from other sites?

      PAY YOUR NETSCAPE USERS! This is just desparate.
    • SPARTACVS, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Instead of buying out top users from established, successful sites like Digg, why not just make your own site not suck so that it can actually attract users on it's own steam?
    • zebwinz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6So Jason, you've got quite a heavy amount of diggs under your belt? Where exactly did you get the idea for your Netscape social-bookmarking site again?
    • blbennett, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3totally right dove, you would have to pay me to use netscape. Also remember that 80% of their audience is people who don't know how to change their homepage.
  • jdawg, on 10/12/2007, -8/+4TheDove: We may, in fact, hire from the Netscape pool as well. Right now we are looking for folks with a well establishd track record... since Netscape is < 30 days old you really can't tell who the best leaders are yet.

    DIGG, REDDIT, Delicious, Newsvine, etc. have users who've been doing Social Bookmarking/News for 1-2 years--those are the first folks we should pick from in my mind.
    • thedove, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6oh funny...i've actually been tracking this netscape fiasco since you first blogged about it.

      i never saw anything where you said you're going to pay for netscape users. or did you just decide that after my comment?
  • thedove, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"since Netscape is < 30 days old you really can't tell who the best leaders are yet."

    EXACTLY!!!! how about giving your ***** community a chance to shine?! You've already dumped your audience b/c they trash your own digg-clone. Now you've posted 3-4 blog submissions trying to plead your case. You're sooooo reactive to all this, but you won't admit it. Actually, you CAN'T admit it, that'd be bad PR.
  • inhalent, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13I say they settle this with a thumb war.
  • dygitaljoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Re: Joshpeek >>

    It isn't "bitching". He is responding to statements said by one of the Internet's social bookmarking movers and shakers. He's responded to TechCrunch's Mike Arrington, as well. That's accountability. If he doesn't respond, Digg'rs would simply say "pwnd". He cites valid points concerning the future of Digg, Yahoo, and Netscape.
  • jdawg, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2funny... the story has been killed. We knew that would happen.... :-)
    • thedove, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9ugh...you're a slimeball, jason.

      instead of trying to cover your ass on digg why not spend some time on your own site?
    • 2ndDairy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"We knew that would happen.... :-)"

      Do you want to know why?
      It's because everyone here thinks you're an attention-whoring ass hat.

      Here's an idea, make a site that is BETTER than the competition or, *gasp* maybe even original, and the audience will come to you naturally.
      The best part is, you get to keep all that money!
  • hotbeefman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I don't wanna get in the middle of a personal situation, but who cares if Kevin gets rich. He doesn't give a rats ass about any of you... Maybe he'll spend some of it to make a new cooler thing we don't even know about?
  • gwjc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Hmmmm, it got buried.. I wondered how it could be hitting like 52 diggs and not be on the front. Overzealous mod I guess, doesn't know that censorship is the Devil's canoe.
    • BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Strange indeed. It went to the top of the queue rather quickly and then was buried without hittng the front page. No reports showed up on digg spy. Shenanigans.
    • bluephoenix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I think it's obvious that despite what they say about no editing it's pretty clear that anything that makes digg look bad will be dropped off the site...it's just business..not that I agree with it given the supposed democratic nature of the site....this is pure genius marketing and promotion on the part of calacanis.....welcome to the real world Mr. Rose
  • tankko, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Why are you so eager to work so hard to make the digg owners rich? Come on, they are leaching off you guys and they know it. They see Jason come along and say something they don't want you to know, mainly that you're making them lots of money and they don't have to pay you.

    Sweet deal for them. Sucker deal for you. Seriously. Put away your rabid fan-boyissum and think about it.
    • Nemesiz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3May I ask why you are here in stead of Netscape?

      And I am no fanboy but if you don't agree with a website... Don't visit it.

    • tankko, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You know, it's not a US vs THEM thing here. I enjoy a lot of sites for different reasons. I like slashdot AND I like digg. I'm not a huge fan of netscape yet, but who knows.

      Also, when does not agreeing with something mean you shut-up and leave? Maybe there is a lot you like about it and want it to get better.

    • 2ndDairy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Leeching?

      It's called providing a service. I like it, so I use it. Why shouldn't they make money off creating something that people enjoy?
      All this ***** about paying top users is stupid. Digg is a business. It's intention was always to make money, not to share with everyone. That's been clear to everyone from the start, and yet, they still use it. I'm just grateful that such a great resource is available for free.

      The fact that Netscape is throwing money at their problem of blowing hard just shows how ignorant they really are.
  • manatee, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8Calacanis sucks big fat monkey balls
  • andru, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Whoever buried this story, that is just pathetic. There are valid points being brought up here, namely that Kevin simply created a site that WE pretty much run. He is free to do whatever he wants with his day, unless there are server problems. He literally makes money off of the work of others. Jason decides to pay people rather than to just rake in the cash for AOL...and..that...is a bad thing?

    How?
  • whoatemydigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The bottom line is. Digg doesnt not own its users. Digg is a service. Its an infrastructure for sharing web pages and discussing web pages. If Netscape offers to hire people (specifically to digg users) to share stories exclusively through Netscape then its within their right to do do so. If Digg management is upset then they have a distorted understanding of what Digg.com is.
  • mozzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The top contributors knew all along what they would get for their laborious hours spent here: No Monetary Compensation, Internet Popularity. Remember, as much as we all love Digg, this is a business. There will always be competitors, and they will sometimes poach talent when needed.

    I will not criticize those that choose to jump ship. Because when it comes down to it, Digg doesn't pay their bills. Being a top submitter doesn't put food on the table.

    This is part of the American Dream: seizing rewarding opportunities when they present themselves. Kevin will certainly take advantage when its time to sell-off Digg, why not the hard-working folk that has helped make this site popular?
  • thedove, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5uh oh...more calacanis/weblogs, inc. shills are entering the digg arena!

    it's not that they're paying users...it's that they can't get their own registered users to post good stories so they're selling them out and trying to transplant them for something any 8 year old with a RSS reader can do. THEIR COMMUNITY SUCKS and they know it, they just can't admit b/c that's bad business
  • spryguy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3He has some valid points. I really don't know what all the bitching is about.

  • riddlebox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4http://tech.netscape.com/story/2006/07/25/switch-from-netscape-to-digg/

    PUT THIS GUY TO SHAME. DIGG PLEASE I CALL OUT TO THOSE WHO WANT TO DIGG TO REIGN FROM THIS ***** *NUTSACK* VOTE THIS STORY TO THE MAIN PAGE AND LET NETSCAPE USERS DECIDE WHO IS BETTER.
    • JakeMcMahon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Whatever you linked to, has been terminated. You made a good(...) point but next time, turn off caps :)
  • totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2like watching two aging queens in a pathetic bitchslap fight. A web 2.0 bitchslap fight.
  • cambrown99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is reminding me of that time when Eminem tried to pick a fight with Moby.
  • goldenarcher, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Desperado Calacanis
  • techjunkie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Alright people... nothing can beat digg... enough said
  • MajorZero64, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3From Jason's Blog Post:

    Also, Kevin has some facts wrong:

    1. The top DIGG users have not changed that much over time.
    2. The top DIGG users are not responsible for 14% of stories--they are responsible for over 50%.

    So all of a sudden this guy knows more about digg than the guy who created it and has full access to it?
  • James_Dean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Calacanis started pissing me off ever since the infamous TWiT 57. What an ass.
  • kroovyrooker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Calcanass' claim that this is a serious discussion is a joke and is really about his wanting/needing attention.

    Besides the aforementioned, why is this is not a serious discussion? Because this is a really a question of "Free Will" and "Choice".

    No one is FORCING Digg users to submit stories. Submitting a story to Digg is NOT a life necessity. And if you don't like the fact that people aren't getting compensated, you have the choice to go do something else. It really is that simple.

    I think Calcanass is really the one doing the attacking here. He conveniently disregards the fundamental idea of Democratic free will. Instead, he favor of more obvious and crass motive, shameless self-promotion. I bet he voted for Bush.

  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
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.