What is Digg?188 Comments
- craftyguy, on 01/23/2008, -6/+224new algorithm:
if (user.bribe){ promote(user.story) } - jquipp, on 01/23/2008, -1/+94What ... I didn't get the memo?
- oboy, on 01/23/2008, -11/+101"You attention please. There is a glitch in the Matrix. Please do not be alarmed. Follow the men in the suits and dark glasses and everything will be fine."
- nico623, on 01/23/2008, -2/+63Ah! Yeah. It's just we're putting new coversheets on all the TPS reports before they go out now. So if you could go ahead and try to remember to do that from now on, that'd be great. All right!
- notque, on 01/23/2008, -14/+59It seems a bit more sanitized. CBS News has started putting digg links from digg candidates (U.S. Elections) on their website, and I'm sure they pay digg. U.S. Elections has seemed more tightly controlled since then. Every article is now on Obama, or Guliani, Or Romney, or Clinton.
No more Kucinich, or Paul, or war crimes.
It seems as if digg is tweaking the algorithm to remove the rougher sides of it's population base, and turn us into a mainstream media, comedy site.
Or I could be wrong. Go to digg candidates right now and look what's there. Is it more favorable to C.B.S. than it used to be. What about tomorrow? The day after? - derrickgossman, on 01/23/2008, -9/+49I couldn't care much less.
- notque, on 01/23/2008, -5/+44I've noticed suddenly stories I submit take over 150 diggs in 24 hours. It used to be around 60-80. I've had multiple stories with a huge number of diggs that won't go, while I've seen articles with 20 diggs hit the frontpage. It's nuts.
- inactive, on 01/23/2008, -0/+39if username = MrbabyMan...
***** it, you get the idea... - bamafun, on 01/23/2008, -2/+40hey J! If you'd gotten here on time this morning you would have heard the site wide announcement over the loud digg speaker at 6am ........
- Error601, on 01/23/2008, -0/+36How about "all users are the same after they've been on long enough to know they're not automated"
- martalli, on 01/23/2008, -1/+35Then I won't digg this story until you go get me a Mountain Dew.
- notque, on 01/23/2008, -1/+33There's advertising on digg?
- Albionshores, on 01/23/2008, -5/+36This isn't going to effect the adverts is it? The adverts always seem to work, even when I can't shout, look at a profile or load a screen - I always get my adverts and I don't know what I'd do without them.
Why would new users come to digg if they didn't have the lure of T-mobile, hunting with MossyOak and a free 30 day Skin-tensive trial; which not only restore but smooths AND firms, or so I am assured!
I can understand Digg wanting to draw fresh blood by making it easier for a newbie to get FP and so changing its system even if that does mean more Spammers and BuryGroups.
I can understand why Digg wants to help keep things fresh by getting Digg moderators in to 'trim the fat' (or as I like to put it, 'shove a pencil into the heart of why Digg is called Digg')
....but please, for the love of all that is Kevin, don't ***GET RID OF THE ADVERTS!!!!**** - Brad324, on 01/23/2008, -1/+32if not article.MurdochApproved { delete(article); ban(submitter) }
- bwoodall, on 01/23/2008, -1/+31the only thing i've noticed is my iGoogle page Digg module looks different and doesn't work...at all.
- ymerej, on 01/23/2008, -0/+25Ah, the GameSpot algorithm. Good choice, good choice.
- wattznext, on 01/23/2008, -4/+27Snob is a noun buddy, not an adjective
- badwithcomputer, on 01/23/2008, -1/+23eastern or pacific? ...because i'm usually around for both
- dubjah, on 01/23/2008, -0/+21Nice to see the Digg effect hasn't changed since the maintenance. "500 Internal Server Error"
- nymphetamine, on 01/23/2008, -6/+26"t3h ron paul/dennis kuciinich censored again!" conspiracy theories FTL!
- Brad324, on 01/23/2008, -2/+20don't be so douchebag.
- WordsnCollision, on 01/23/2008, -3/+21Why ISN'T there an announcement from Digg admin? Is there even an Announcements link where such info can be posted? There should be - at least there would be if admin cared about its members. Hello??
- Kronos6948, on 01/23/2008, -0/+17You have to realize for this site to make money (Which, let's face it, it's about making money), either they have to have adverts, or they have to have subscriptions. If they make people subscribe=epic fail.
- estacado, on 01/23/2008, -2/+19They change algorithm all the time. It's not that big of a deal.
- daborg, on 01/23/2008, -5/+20How about just submitting good stories and letting the users and the system decide, instead of trying to figure out how to game it?
- SmackedbyEVO, on 01/23/2008, -1/+16http://duggmirror.com/tech_news/The_Digg_Algorithm ...
- T8erT0T, on 01/23/2008, -2/+15Mixx looks mildly retarded. And yeah, people are just flocking over to mixx in the masses. Judging by the homepage and looking at the Votes it seems to have a swelling community of about 80 people.
::Snooze Button:: - oldhick, on 01/23/2008, -0/+13I'll be glad if they come up with a method to reduce the "my group of friends digg every stupid article i post and I fill the front page with same crap day after day" problem! Here's to hope...
- unicronband, on 01/23/2008, -0/+12O RLY?
- notque, on 01/23/2008, -0/+12You can wait, but it's obvious there's been a significant change.
- daborg, on 01/23/2008, -2/+13"GET RID OF THE ADVERTS!!!!"
While I agree with you that it would be nice to have no ads, on the other hand... Do you have any idea how much it costs to run a site like Digg? Shedloads of money. Truckloads. No really, it's insanely expensive.
So unless you have a constructive suggestion as to how Digg is going to make the money to pay for the upkeep of this site if ads are removed, what you're suggesting is basically a death sentence for Digg. - skankyBacon, on 01/23/2008, -3/+14Agreed. Why anyone thinks it's such a huge deal to have submitted a front page story is beyond me.
- dcsears, on 01/23/2008, -0/+11The algorithm may be different, but Digg still crashes pages...
- bitspace, on 01/23/2008, -0/+11The soshable.com algorithm has changed. Any attempts to access any content will now be redirected to an error page.
- Shakermaker, on 01/23/2008, -2/+12Your
- StacyWebb, on 01/23/2008, -3/+13Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@soshable.socialnewswatch.com and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache/1.3.39 Server at soshable.com Port 80
hmm maybe a little testing first? - moletimer, on 01/23/2008, -3/+13Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /digg-algorithm-change/ on this server.
Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. - wild, on 01/23/2008, -1/+11I couldnt tell you the name of one DIgg user without looking. (Well, anicejew, but that was because I kept reading everyone else's responses to him.) I just digg what I like, and dont worry about the rest.
- daborg, on 01/23/2008, -1/+11I went to Mixx to check out what was so great about it. Four pages later I hadn't seen a single interesting headline. Digg at least has a couple.
- thcobbs, on 01/23/2008, -6/+16maybe because they are Spam, and they are ignoring it.
- akatherder, on 01/23/2008, -2/+12Buried as inaccurate. Maybe the downtime caused a problem with the timing in between diggs that caused articles to jump to the front page. Maybe certain people submitted more stories than usual or other people submitted less. Maybe there was more/less interesting news stories than usual.
How abou the Heath Ledger story getting 20,000 diggs? That could cause other diggs to get watered down based on a comparison of the top story. How often do stories break 5,000 diggs, much less 10K, much less DOUBLE that? - vroom101, on 01/23/2008, -9/+18I'm going to wait for a few or many official words from Mr. Kevin Rose.
- inactive, on 01/23/2008, -3/+12You STILL don't get it, don't you? You think you are outsmarting Digg, but Digg outsmarting you. They KNOW when people create multiple accounts. And when those multiple accounts are used to digg the same stories over and over, not only does it not count as a digg, but it counts as a bury, or something similar.
You are only screwing yourselves by trying to game the algorithm with multiple accounts. - truspect0r, on 01/23/2008, -0/+9Please stop spamming mixx.
- daborg, on 01/23/2008, -0/+9Ok, now that's fair enough.
- jspegele, on 01/23/2008, -1/+9I don't think he's trying to game Digg, I think he just wants to know when to blow his load because he got another story to the front page and Kevin Rose might have seen his user profile.
Seriousely, it's not a tragedy if Digg gives users who don't friend every user they've ever seen a chance to have a story go popular. - notque, on 01/23/2008, -6/+14I am talking about after the algorithm changes. Not before. I believe the previous stories have caused the algorithm changes.
But why not consider discussing the issue rationally. I could be wrong, but I don't feel any need to give you a "***** break." - xpose, on 01/23/2008, -3/+11Digg is like your favorite sports team. You care about it and feel loyal to it, yet it can give two ***** about you.
- gbarberi, on 01/23/2008, -3/+11What we need is an algorithm to get rid of people like you. More comments than diggs and full of hate.
- oldhick, on 01/23/2008, -2/+9Why don't you start a site dedicated to Ron Paul, I'm sure the rest of us Diggers wouldn't mind at all. While I support Dr. Paul, I like the old Digg where there were a variety of stories. Now they're all Clinton is a lying sack of *****, impeach Bush, Ron Paul rocks...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 186 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is