Digg

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

Slashdot's Rob Malda doesn't matter. Digg wins.

money.cnn.com — Business 2.0 puts Rob Malda/Slashdot on the "10 people that don't matter" citing digg as having supplanted the venerable "news for nerds"

Bury

el73 1 year 330 days ago, made popular 1 year 330 days ago

272 diggs
digg it

SnapETom, on 10/12/2007, -9/+46Awesome. This just reinforces what we know. I read both Digg and Slashdot. Slashdot and fanboys on both sides can argue quality of stories, quality of comments, etc. However, the truth is, Digg gives me more at a faster rate, and that's what I want. It's just that simple.
- wolkengrau, on 10/12/2007, -9/+38I got exactly the same thoughts.
  
  Browsing Slashdot often feels like Groudhog Day.
  
  edit: I see first guys are modding me down. Why? Prove me, that I'm wrong.
- rm999, on 10/12/2007, -14/+23"Browsing Slashdot often feels like Groudhog Day."
  
  How is that different than Digg? I think something like half the stories on here are dupes, and when someone points it out his comment gets buried instead of the duped story.
- gameboyhippo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26Not only that, but Digg gives more at a faster rate than the paid version of /.
- wolkengrau, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@rm999:
  That's true: There are unfortunately quite some dupes - don't want to argue with you about that.
  
  I rather wanted to point out, that the stories are mostly are found on digg first. So when I find them on Slashdot, I have already read about them on digg.
- thedove, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24unless you're actively reporting duplicates as you see them, you CANNOT complain about duplicates. as a user on digg, the content is YOUR responsibility.
- JaredRR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Digg lets me browse story ~submissions~ and it lets me vote, not just wait around for The Editors to approve a story. Slashdot was great for it's time, but Digg has a better model.
  
  Of course, there's no reason Slashdot couldn't incorporate some elements....
- Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -14/+13Has nobody noticed that Slashdot actually *listened* and fixed the dupe problem? At the beginning of the year, it was terrible, but I don't think there's been a single dupe for a couple of months now. That's a big improvement over how things were.
  
  Digg, on the other hand, has more dupes than Slashdot did at its worst, and what's more, they are not just tolerated by most of the people on Digg, but anybody who points out the previous story is buried. That means the problem is only going to get worse as time goes by.
  
  Furthermore, Slashdot has fewer embarrassments of articles like this one, where you couldn't appear to be more of a fanboy if you wore Kevin Rose's photo on a t-shirt. Seriously, "Digg wins"? Grow the ***** up and try not to get such a hard-on for a simple news aggregation website.
- adamlazz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2But, there are no 2 ways around the fact that dig will need to make some major improvements to v3 if they want to become ANYTHING liek slashdot EVER was.
  
  But for the time being.. digg still wins.
- RandomPrecision, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I guess it's too bad for you then that Digg's focus is shifting away from this?
- packetguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Digg is a news site. Slashdot is also a news site, but more importantly, slashdot is a subculture. There is no way digg can come up to that level in less than 3-4 years. Till then there is no contest.
  
  Offtopic, Business 2.0 does not render properly in Firefox. Is it in the list of 10 websites which don't matter? LOL
- pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I have only one thing to say. Ultrafar......... Line dead.
- Seumas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I use digg because I'm lazy and while slashdot is eight letters, digg is only four.
rm999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16I don't like this list - I feel like they don't give great reasons for saying these people don't matter. For example, their reason for including Linus Torvalds is:
"Torvalds's project has matured to such an extent that it's largely outgrown its illustrious creator."

That doesn't mean much - he's still the most influencial single person to Linux and is the name everyone associates wiht it. Of course other people will be working on a project that large. That's like saying Bill Gates doesn't matter because he doesn't work on Windows.

I feel like a lot of these other ones are just predictions based on short-term sucess. They would have put steve jobs on this list 8 years ago just because he was having a slump. They claim the CEO of netflix doesn't matter because DVDs are going to be replaced with video on demand. This is a very strong statement for such a long-term prediction.

I agree that Rob Malda doesn't matter, but did that even need to be said? He's just the editor for slashdot, not a CEO that changes the way the industry works. The only influence he ever had was giving more traffic (temporarily) to some websites.
- Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Agreed. Even when movie stores online start getting into it, you'll still be hard pressed downloading a high def. movie in less than a day, and that's with it tieing up all your bandwidth. Netflix ships within 24 hours in some cases, and as i assume they'll switch to shipping high def. movies, Netflix isn't going anywhere soon.
el73, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Digg give more at a fast rate, and slashdot give a good sample for those that don't have to "digg" through the rest. All about preference. I use both- but mostly slashdot oddly enough.
llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2kevin rose digg in ... 3, 2, 1
Wiggles2, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Slashdot? What's that? :P
Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2dun dun dun malda just bit the dust
Paktu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Each site serves a different purpose, I don't see why they can't coexist. Personally, I go to digg for the news, and slashdot for the discussion.
- aoe2bug, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6"slashdot for the discussion"
  
  you're kidding right?
- CharlesDarwin, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2EVERYOINE KNOWS THE BEST DISCUSSION'S IS IN DIGG BECAUSE WE ARE SMARTER FTW!!!
- RandomPrecision, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I think the previous comment in this thread really answers the question of what site has better discussion.
  
  Oh, did I say "thread"? Silly me. Digg only supports one level down...
- vostok4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5aoe2bug... Have you read the comments on ./? The majority of those people are industry players, they know what they are talking about. Other than the odd joke here and there, there are actual insightful comments written by professionals with an opinion backed up by relevant facts.
  
  On digg yourt average comment is 1 line... and contributes absolutely nothing to the story. Everyone and their grandma thinks they are a pro here. I've yet to see one knowledgable comment on digg that tells me more than I knew.
  
  ./ For the discussions, digg for the volume of news (even though half of it is stupid, the other half still outnumbers what ./ puts out).
heinousjay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14It's a shame that reading the comments on Digg contributes to brain damage. That's where Slashdot still wins the race.
- adamlazz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Yes. but I am not too good with words.
  
  v3 is coming though, and i can't wait.
- CharlesDarwin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I hope they get a new look. v2 looks like someone vomited on the page...
MrHolla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well, he's in good company at least. And I agree with Paktu - both sites serve a different purpose.
badfeng, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Disrespectful.
interiot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Now if Digg could just get a full comments system, and an externally visible karma system (digg already has a complicated karma system under the hood), and a full friends system. What's that you say? Digg v3?
arcology01, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4digg: because fan boys are better than elitist snobs
- KeyWest, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2i thought they are elitist fanboys here, isn't that the best way to be?
ctbfourone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10That was a totally lame article stub.

Let's ***** on two of the biggest things in tech circles of the last 10 years: Slashdot and Linus Torvalds.

Screw you Business 2.0. Your magazine sucks.
Vitaliy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Considering the fact that Rob Malda was mentioned amongst Linus Torvalds, Jonathan Schwartz, and Ken Kutaragi is quite an accomplishment.

In reality, ***** online journalists are the ones who do not matter.
Lacero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Geez. What a ***** list to be on.
8bit_Hero, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6dupe. original article here: http://digg.com/technology/10_people_who_don_t_matter
- fugazi, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1Who says its a dupe once it get to the front page! Ohhh no you didnt get your article to the front page.. Are you going to go kill yourself now? Your self esteem must be so low now that you didnt get your 5 seconds of fame..
- stmiller, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Sorry dude. Looks like you got beat by about half an hour.
- dmron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Sorry, your article didn't put down slashdot, so not enough people here liked it. This one on the other hand talks about how awesome digg and what a piece of trash slashdot is, therefore you lose. 'Tis the digg way, unfortunately.
reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I can't believe Mark Zuckerberg(founder of Facebook) turned down $750 million for his site. Who would pay $2 billion for a social networking site??

Talk about being greedy.
- zacharychaos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Are you even on Facebook? Its much better then MySpace. There's actually a point to it. Myspace has limited appeal (unless you are a pedophile).
  
  Also, maybe he just DIDN'T WANT to sell. Is that so wrong?
- reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yeah I am on Facebook, and it is much better, but $2 billion?
  
  Who wouldn't want to sell his/her site for $750 mil? Please don't say that he LOVES his site and doesn't want it to fall in the hands of evil businessmen. Everything has a price.
- zacharychaos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oh come on. would you sell your child? what if you put all your work into something, just to sell it and see it destroyed by a corporate mongrel?
scott1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've been digg fan for a long time but I have one very stupid question that could possibly be burried for:
What's slashdot?
- gavintlgold, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Take a look: http://slashdot.org/
- HunterZ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If I told you to search Google, would you ask me what Google is too? (j/k)
Lososaurus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Awesome how Kutaragi is on that list too.
twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Did anyone notice that Linus Torvalds was on that list too?
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1-deleted-
kevinrose, on 10/12/2007, -2/+51I have tremendous respect for Rob Malda. I don't think he should be on this list.
- Vladek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6If only Rob Malda had the same respect for his website's readers. For years we have been complaing of dupes, gramatical errors, and plain bad journalism on the site, but he doesn't listen. Since it's "his" website, "he" can do anything he wants in it. No wonder he's so despised -- he doesn't care the about the audience he serves.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"For years we have been complaing of dupes, gramatical errors"
  
  oh the irony..
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Kevin, was this removed from the site? I can't find it anywhere (searching, front page, etc...)
  
  I think that site is kinda harsh- While I'm no fan of Slashdot (especially after finding Digg), I dont think its fair to say Rob doesn't matter..
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4it was buried: http://digg.com/search?search=slashdot&submit=Search&area=promoted&type=both&age=7&search-buried=on
- scott1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3After looking at slashdot I have to agree with you.
  It looks like that you got the idea to start form digg(no idea is orginal).
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Wow I can't believe I did that...
  
  I figured it was buried when I went looking for it, but a search didn't display any results... I completely forgot to click the "Include Buried Stories" check box
  
  (I'm on another computer than usual, and my usual computer has a grease monkey script I wrote that automatically checks it... That's what happens when you mix digging with sleep deprivation)
  
  So, since it didn't show up (I clicked Login, and when I got back it was buried already), and I couldn't find it, I assumed it wasn't just buried, but that Kevin deleted it...
- valour, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2As someone who used to work for OSTG and met Malda a few times at company events, I can say that he doesn't do much for the company or for Slashdot anymore, PR aside. He's in a position where he can goof around most of the time, when he isn't working on Slashcode, much like Robin Miller goofs around with his videos and books when he should be managing NewsForge. That's another story for another time, though. Malda hardly ever posts stories to Slashdot -- the other editors do all of that work.
  
  Slashdot is not Rob Malda's site, really. It belongs to OSTG, and a number of editors and managers run it. If you like what Slashdot is doing, it has more to do with a dozen other people than it does with Rob. If you like Slashcode and think it is a work of genius, even that seems to get more from Chris Nandor and Jamie McCarthy than Rob Malda these days.
  
  What exactly does he do that is so wonderful? What does Rob Malda do to earn your respect? I'm not saying he's a bad guy, but from my frame of reference, the only major impact he has on technology these days is as a panel judge at LinuxWorld conferences.
- Greenfday6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2there are alot of people that shouldn't be on this list, this list is crap
Quaoar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think /. has always had a problem with accessibility - nothing was straightforward in comments and the construction was not the best, IMO, YMMV. The articles were culled in conformance with the 'techno-geek' theory so there was technical depth but no societal breadth. Digg is more of a technology/science news aggregator than /. which is good for me at least.

Adapt or die in the web business!

Q
traemccombs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow, Rob's an old Friend of mine, and while I too have been bitten by the digg bug, it's kind of cool seeing his name up there with the likes of Steve Balmer and other big wigs. :) If he doesn't matter, then why mention him?
- valour, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Maybe because the new way of doing online tech news is to have readers promote/demote stories, and Slashdot is still stuck in the previous era where paid editors picked them. Malda should not be blamed for Slashdot's failure to adapt, I think, because he only has limited control over it.
RandomPrecision, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So no one else is just getting a blank page?
tinker123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I liked slashdot and only came to digg after slashdot got me ***** off:

- my stories rejected without an explanation, similar stories by others accepted
- the editors violating their own content rules
- a percieved "***** off" attitude to anyone wanting to make a suggestion or wanting to contact the site

Digg has the pull factor that I too, a non-site owner, can actually post new articles
artman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm a refugee from FARK.COM. Is Drew on that list? I DRTFA.

I used to hang around fark two years ago until I got sick of it. Came back last year and it's even worse. Picture "Animal House" on acid...

So I am lurking here on digg and I am liking it more and more. Can't wait for the expansion too.

/will there be a photoshop contest?
dmron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What a joke. Why do we need articles like this... ya know, I was starting to have a bit of hope for digg... I think it's been at least a few weeks since I've seen a "we're better than slashdot" story... and then this troll-a-rific story comes along. I *hate* reading about this kind of stuff. Why does everyone here like stroking their own ego so much? Why does digg have to be the best? Does it really matter? I come to this site because it's updated so much and usually has up to date news and whatever, but then there's crap like this that ***** me off and makes me want to never come back.

And don't even get me started about the difference in quality of discussion between here and slashdot. Digg is a ***** joke when it comes to discussions. Slashdot has its share of trolls of course, but their moderation system tends to work well and the people there actually try to have conversations and dont sound like they're 7 years old on their daddy's computer.
stable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Personally I prefer Slashdot. Not for the stories, but for the comments and the mature moderation system that Digg lacks. On Slashdot there isn't as much bias in comment moderation as here. Unlike in here, I rarely feel unfairly moderated on slashdot, and I've been there for much much longer.

Slash (the content management system used on Slashdot) is also available as free software while digg's isn't.
- tek1024, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree. Slashdot's maturity and complex threaded/moderation model lends a greater feel of community.
  
  That said, having been a long time (since about '99) lurker at Slashdot, I've hardly ever posted a comment, because I feel so underqualified. There ARE many more industry players there, and experts in every field. This means that "me too" posts get modded to oblivion, and you REALLY have to say something insightful, informative, funny, or what have you, in order to not be picked apart. And even then, you'll say something from an expert voice and get +5 Insightful; the guy that comes up after you will counterpoint and make +5 Insightful himself, from an opposite point of view. The dregs, you don't even see if you put your view level at +1 or +2.
  
  That makes it more intimidating for lesser geeks like myself to post comments there--but it's also wonderful, because the comments are so good that you come away from Slashdot discussion feeling more informed on the issue.
  
  At Digg, it's a little different. I feel qualified to post here. You do, too. My experiences in comp sci, programming, psychology, and philosophy all combine to make me feel qualified to whatever extent to post on something like, for instance, this. The community itself is younger, more raw, less refined, and that's a good thing for n00bs and even intermediates who want to climb the ladder of knowledge to expert level.
  
  The difference is like that between a good Scotch on the rocks and a fruity mixed drink. Not everyone has a taste for the Scotch, and why wait? The refinement of Slashdot means deja vu, having to wait for articles that Digg sometimes picks up, but it also means getting the inside track on expert opinions along with a smattering of inside jokes and community feel. The quick, democratic pace and tone of Digg means that there are duplicate stories, lots of "me too" comments, lots of misinformation, but that's the cost of having more news, more quickly.
  
  Hence, both Digg and Slashdot feeds remain in my RSS aggregator!
  
  That said, an article declaring Linus Torvalds and Rob Malda obsolete is, IMHO, undiggable.
HunterZ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I've been a slashdot fan forever (even have a 5 digit user id), but digg has slowly been winning me over due to its higher responsiveness.

My main complaint with digg, though, is that more often than not Firefox freezes for 5 seconds whenever I switch to the tab containing the main page. It's probably mostly due to somewhat weak video hardware on this computer, but I haven't noticed the issue with other sites.
cklol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7This is rediculous. Sure, Digg has a lot more stories but Slashdots are a helluva lot more worthwhile.
Sure, Digg has discussion, but the discussions here are complete and absolute trash and ***** compared to the stuff on Slashdot. You could write a paper off some of the comments I've seen on Slashdot. Here? Prepubescent kids flaming each other...or maybe just idiots flaming each other. Who can tell?
Edit:
This will probably get buried because I'm just kinda blowing off about how much I hate the immaturity on Digg.
- HunterZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, it seems to me that while there are more quality posts on Slashdot, there's a proportionally higher amount of crap as well. Digg, by comparison, tends to move too fast to give time for in-depth discussions to take place.
  
  Maybe the best approach for me is to watch Digg for the first scoop, then pop on over to Slashdot later (when they finally get around to posting it) for the discussion.
johnsmith45678, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0Rob Malda (with the ***** handle "CmdrTaco") never mattered. Except as a total dweeb.
- HunterZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm curious. When you post comments like that, don't you realize that you're going to get buried? Seems like a waste of time to post obvious attempts at trolling like that when noone is going to see it after a couple of minutes of being modded down.
Cheeseness, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm a regular slashdot and digg reader. I'm very pro community driven media, but the controlled editorial flow of /. gives me stream of content (albeit not as fast) in a very specific style/quality (and it's usually not full of people saying "This is a tech site! How did this crud make front page??").

The way I see it, slashdot and digg both feed off each other, and both can comfortably supply nerdy news to the numerous masses without really stepping on each other's turf. Digg delivers a more mainstream, rapidly updated service while /. delivers a very specific type of more elitist commentary.

I don't see what the fuss is all about.
templest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Personally, I've left Slashdot for Digg. Seems so much more *alive*, dunno.
It's like Slashdot is the farm, and Digg NYC. That's the feel I get, anyways.

I like busy. :P
cliedwar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Looks like this story was buried. But why?

(Sorry - first comment was about this story disappearing from the front page. I later realized it was buried so I edited my comment -- but I still don't understand why it was buried. Did users do it or is it editorial control?)
- HunterZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've seen it happen before, and was told that it was probably due to a bunch of people reporting the story as lame/inaccurate/whatever.
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not just buried.. more like deleted...
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1haha nevermind ignore my last comment.. Basically I have a grease monkey script on my other computer that automatically clicks the "Include Buried Stories" thing, and I forgot to check it when I was searching for it, and assumed it was deleted since it didn't show up
Jarrod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can't wait to read about this on Slashdot tomorrow.

And therein lies both sides of the entire Digg vs. Slashdot debate.
CookieClown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Did you all notice that Kevin's in the 50 people that matter (sharing the spot with Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia). Rank #23. (http://money.cnn.com/popups/2006/biz2/peoplewhomatter/frameset.exclude.html and scroll to 23). Go Kevin!
drwiii, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Some would say Time Warner (Business 2.0, CNN, etc.) doesn't matter. Bill Gates said as much in a 1995 interview with TIME magazine --

TIME: "Are you betting the company on Windows 95?"

Gates: "I don't know what 'bet the company' means. We're a company with $4 billion in the bank. I don't think we'll disappear. We're not like Time Warner, with $15 billion in debt."

And for the last time, Digg and Slashdot aren't in competition. Digg is good for zero-day time-critical information and Slashdot is good for long-term in-depth discussion. Why can't they coexist? Any list that includes Reed Hastings and Linus Torvalds isn't worth the hard drive space it occupies.
lupinglade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the news get here faster than slash, too bad... but their new design is nice? PS. I didn't think Rob himself ever really mattered?
verifex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Digg has alot more comments, but alot less useful discussion it seems, since every single freaking comment gets seen, I like the multi-threaded slashdot better.
Jessehk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1There are 3 prominent newspapers in Toronto, Ontario, Canada: The Toronto Star, The National Post, and the Globe and Mail.

The Toronto star has more news (Teen shot, potential strike, etc), but both the National Post and the Globe and Mail offer more.

My favorite is the Globe, and there is a very good reason: the editorials and letters. Intelligent people write controversial, (mostly informed) opinions, and often, there are isolated debates between letter writers. Quite similar to the comments on Slashdot.

Furthermore, the editors and editorial writers are not afraid to write about their true feelings on an issue. If somebody reading the opinion piece disagrees, they will usually write a letter (which is published). Open discussion is encouraged. There are letters and editorial sections in other newspapers, but none compare to the importance the Globe seems to place on them.

I often learn more about the world by reading these letters and editorials then from just reading the straight-facts articles. This is the same situation with Slashdot and Digg. With Digg, you get the stories fast and a bunch of (rarely meaningful) comments. There is a certain sophistication and wisdom about the atmosphere at Slashdot.
Nobody can deny that.
astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2For every interesting link that makes to the Digg's front page there are 10 links that are utter garbage. And that interesting link will be wiped off the front page in an hour anyway, replaced by more crap. And don't forget that the interesting link will be underneath a couple blog-spam layers. Not to mention the pathetic quality of link descriptions. And how about those comments, full of trolls and groupthink.

Links that make it to Slashdot's front page are seen by more eyes because the links stay on the front page for about a day, rather than an hour. Not to mention that the link is more often than not accompanied by an insightful description and interesting discussion. In other words, it means much more to make it onto Slashdot.

Digg is an interesting experiment, but it's more interesting for the things it fails at rather than its successes. If you want to rate websites solely on page views, Digg probably beats Slashdot, simply due to the sheer volume of links that pass through digg. But there's no question that Slashdot still holds much more influence and impact that digg ever could in its current state, despite what some yahoo at Business 2.0 thinks.

This story is a perfect example of what's wrong with digg. The link doesn't even work, for *****'s sake.
- mcduckov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You make good points man and Digg is not the end of the line here. There are still several ways to make this system work better but just like over at slash no one will listen. The thing just has to evolve on its own. Eventually someone is going to realize these are primarily social networking engines (slash got that with their mod system). Problem is where do you find programmers who not only get it but are grounded in the research as well? It will happen eventually.
  
  I still think you could combine slash and digg and have one awesome site. It isn't as hard as it sounds. One small example: if a story keeps getting dugg at a certain rate it stays higher up on the frontpage.
mcduckov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The /. guys found a strategy that worked and they ran with it. They kept running with it even as users became more and more vocal about how much the editors sucked. For a while there really was not a good alternative but now that there is we see the shift happening. I never check /. anymore because it makes me angry. It makes me angry when I see some stupid story that is an obvious slashvertisement; it ***** me off when I see another Roland story; and just the word "Zonk" is enough to make me not want to read / for a week.

The writing was on the wall for a long time and users were itching to get out from under the yolk of editors (especially dimwitted ones).
Jozer99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ok lets not be obnoxious and gloaty. Then you are not better than slashdot. Accept slashdot for the way it contributed to the evolution of internet news, and how it continues to be relivant after over 10 years.
Juano11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For those that are complaining that their comments about duplicate stories get modded down:

You get modded down for "reporting" the duplicate story incorrectly. Duplicates should be reported with the "problem?" option that accompanies every story. Adding a comment about it being a dupe doesn't go anywhere.

Adding a comment that the story is a dupe in the middle of other people's discussion of the article adds nothing to that discussion. The people discussing it either don't know, don't care, or both. Report the story as a dupe appropriately and move on with your life.

Why do you bother to check back and see if your "This story is a duplicate" comment gets modded up or down anyway??? Really, that's pretty sad and pathetic.
TimEllis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If Digg has truly "supplanted" Slashdot, as the article summary supposes, why is it that by some metrics Slashdot is still utterly crushing Digg in popularity? For instance, Bloglines indicates that Digg has 6,235 subscribers, while Slashdot has almost 12 times as many at 73,719! That sure doesn't look like a "supplanting" to me.

Just sayin'.
- el73, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually- "supplanted" was used in the article itself in refrence to sites "like digg." Don't knock the summary- knock the article.
  
  Just sayin'
Lemon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Digg has a higher frequency of articles meaning I get more interesting articles faster... but the quality level of commenting on slashdot is far superior.

Regardless, there's no 'winner' or 'loser' - different strokes for different etc...
moeq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The truth is that real professionals don't use Digg or Slashdot much. They rely on other, more credible, sources. News source that have actual story editors and newsdesk editors that don't report ***** as fact.
el73, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Let it be known that as the article link submitter, I prefer slashdot over dig. digg is information overload.

I submitted the same article to slashdot with a "Does slashdot matter?" type of discussion post asking questions of the slashdot community. It got rejected.

My headline is inflamitory and troll like. I hastily submitted it since I thought I would take advantage of the best feature of digg- the quick responsiveness of the community. Bring to the people quick.

Had I been less urgent in my submittal- I would have phrased it:
"Does slashdot matter? Are sites like digg more relevant now?"

But in fairness to me- I think I summarize the point of the article. The No.1 on the Main article on who *does* matter (my submission is a companion to it) is "You!" meaning- "social" sites like digg and the ilk are clearly the "winners" -hence the "digg wins" part.

But again- just because I submitted the story doesn't mean it's my choice. I just thought it was newsworthy and relevant.

IMO- slashdot is better, digg is quicker, and business2.0 is wack.
ghettoiam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Slashdot's readers appear to be infinitely more knowledgable and mature than Digg readers. If I click on any story submission on Slashdot, there is a plethora of genuinely insightful commentary on the issue. On Digg, it's like a bad day in the newsgroups, flamebait, trolling, etc.

Digg is more like cable news network, where as Slashdot is an in depth essay on the issues.
mGee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Slashdot was wack before digg and continues to be wack now.
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.

Slashdot's Rob Malda doesn't matter. Digg wins.

Login or register to add a comment