digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Troubles in Diggville

techcrunch.com — Techcruch review of recent controversy regarding groups of Diggers controlling the front page. A good overview of the problem and an excerpt of Kevin's response

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • nymphetamine, on 10/12/2007, -247/+70Another thing (some) diggers need to do is to stop freaking out about diggers that get more stories promoted than others. With this new change, this is still going to happen anyway. It's frustrating to hear people say 'oh, you're gaming digg..'. Yes, there are some out there. I've seen the ones that do a bad job of covering up there dirty work, but to say that a person that submits good quality stories is gaming digg, makes no sense.

    The only real problem I see is paranoia and jealousy.
    • bgoodknight, on 10/12/2007, -40/+333The real problem is that these few people control what gets on the front page, and it sucks.

      As of right now, THERE ARE FOUR USERS WITH MORE THAN ONE STORY EACH ON THE FRONT PAGE.
      GEE, youre rigght, no problems there, idiot.

    • deol, on 10/12/2007, -89/+43Gaming or not, I have still enjoyed all the articles I have seen on Digg.
    • Whitey04, on 10/12/2007, -13/+296I've been on digg for almost a year now, and I've noticed the diverity of topics and quality have dropped significantly.
    • gwalbridge, on 10/12/2007, -24/+185If you did a little research, you would find that the few people that seem to be driving the front page content are digging each other regardless of the content of the article. In other words, they're digging their friends simply because they are friends.

      Here's an analogy: This is like Bush nominating court Justices and Prime Ministers simply because he knows them.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -11/+98"The only real problem I see is paranoia and jealousy."

      Then I don't think you understand the problem. As far as I can tell, no one is jealous. People are offended when some are cheating a system that they love (Yeah, some really do love Digg). In fact, the people that are "freaking out" as you put it, probably wouldn't have said a damn thing if they didn't care.
    • JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -7/+67Gaming aside, the front page is essentially a popularity contest amongst a particular cross section of internet and digg users. It's important to keep in mind that a popular viewpoint is not necessarily more valid, correct or insightful than an unpopular one.
    • mockstar, on 10/12/2007, -21/+42If anything, I don't think there's *enough* drama here.
    • BillehBob, on 10/12/2007, -70/+14*yawn*
    • AlmostEvil, on 10/12/2007, -8/+152I agree with Whitey04, digg has been gradually going downhill.

      I'd probably say it took its steepest dive when the site started allowing stuff like political opinion pieces etc. Because of that we're now seeing partisan political nuts joining the site adding to the site in a non-beneficial manner.

      The signal to noise ratio for "digg / dig" has gone up massively in the last few months, it's becoming harder and harder to find the diamonds out of the large piles of dung.
    • bpapa, on 10/12/2007, -52/+15agreed with the original post. it's just a ***** website after all, no need to get crazy over it either way. i like the algorithim changes though and the idea presented in the blog (weigh diggs from upcoming stories page more)
    • neoknight, on 10/12/2007, -40/+4damn, I should have submitted this story from techcrunch.
    • HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -19/+60It is interesting how many new "Top Users" have been added since the Digg added new categories.

      It's strange to see a user who has been around near forever and submitted tons of stories but only has 2 or 3 that "made it" yet you have users with only a month or two under their belt with hundreds of front page stories!!!

      http://www.hmtk.com/blog
    • 0crabby0, on 10/12/2007, -4/+45Bottom of the story update:

      Digg’s top user has supposedly “resigned” in anger over Kevin’s remarks

      http://neothoughts.com/2006/09/07/diggs-top-user-says-goodbye/
    • CharlesDarwin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30I just wish they could remember my comment threshold is NOT 'sort by date (-4 diggs or higher)'
    • rebrad, on 10/12/2007, -9/+72The problems with Digg began when they started accepting stories on Politics and Religion. In the world of over-hyped media induced frenzied spin these topics inevitably lead to propaganda wars. Civil discussion of Politics and Religion is a behavior that no longer exist. Sadly, hate for this or that rules and Digg has injected itself into the middle of this ***** hole.

      Digg needs to concentrate on what it does best and that is Tech news. Science, Gaming, Entertainment and others are good if they are tech related but anything else just opens you up to the ***** artist that are pushing an agenda. If I want to listen to crap I'll turn on CNN or Fox News but I prefer to not jump in the cesspool and search for topics I enjoy.

      In other words, cut the ***** and get back to your roots.
    • seanmc303, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32The problem that I have with a select few controlling what makes it to the front page on Digg is that it ***** up the whole sense of democracy that Digg users get from casting their votes. It is much like Diebold and the 2004 election. If Digg users become disenfranchised with voting and what gets promoted on Digg, users will eventually stop using Digg.
    • RegisteredUser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40> The only real problem I see is paranoia and jealousy.

      Not really. It's about manipulating the news and spamming. Wouldn't you find it odd to see a story about the latest cell phones hitting front page, while a story about a breakthrough in cancer research get lost or buried? That's the real problem here.
    • fishsoda, on 10/12/2007, -9/+30@HMTKSteve

      While we are still complaining about things....

      Thanks for spamming your blog *****.
    • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -12/+8but bgoodnight...in all fairness, part of the reason why this is so is becuase those four users have absolutely no lives whatsoever. They submit so many stories that the law of averages says they will get to the front page so often.

      Remember for some people, Digg is pretty much the only reason to go on living. Sad, but true.
    • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22Ummm, HTMSteve...when you have a "blog" as lame as yours, you REALLY don't want o SPAM any message board like this by putting it in a signature.

      Seriously...all blogs are worthless, but your is the epitome of the worthless blogs. Little kiddies who think that ANYONE wants to rea your silly random thoughts.

      You are what is wrong with the internet these days.
    • deut, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25What I find fascinating is why anyone would be arsed to want to invest over 5 hours a day to be top dog on a web site. Sad, sad people who really need to get a life.

      Personally, I've stopped contributing stories cause I accept I'll never make the front page again, not without getting on p9s50W5k4GUD2c6 friends list anyway.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24"They submit so many stories that the law of averages says they will get to the front page so often."

      Not entirely true. P9 had a 50% promoted story ratio. That's not just the "law of averages" at play.
    • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -22/+20And Steve...just to let you know...

      I plan on clicking on your Google ads hundreds of times, and I encourage other diggers to do the same. That way you will get flagged for Ad Sense Fraud and will not only profit off your SPAM, but you'll lose legitiamte money you've already earned. WE all know that Google does not exactly err on the side of hte user in cases like this..

      So, I am off to take money out of your pocket!
    • lakawak, on 10/12/2007, -25/+9Oh, and Steve...just to let you know...I plan on clicking on your Google ads hundreds of times, and I encourage other diggers to do the same. That way you will get flagged for Ad Sense Fraud and will not only profit off your SPAM, but you'll lose legitiamte money you've already earned. We all know that Google does not exactly err on the side of the user in cases like this..

      So, I am off to take money out of your pocket!
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14"I've been on digg for almost a year now, and I've noticed the diverity of topics and quality have dropped significantly."

      Look at all the frontpage stories and note how many are from the same sites. I've noticed they basically mirror what is posted on a dozen or so popular websites. Every single story from these sites, even if its lame is posted by one person or another. If the "top users" don't post them, *someone else does anyway.* It is not the fault of the frequent submitters that this is happening.

      Diggers have to start being more selective about what they Digg. There's no all-powerful cabal here that can get its stories on the front page, everyone Digging those stories is responsible for that happening. The top users don't have that many active friends on here to give them 100 Diggs in ten minutes, that's regular Diggers doing that.

      The other side of the coin is that there's nothing wrong with supporting top users who consistently find good stories. Why shouldn't they have many of their stories Dugg if they submitted them first?
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8"The signal to noise ratio for "digg / dig" has gone up massively in the last few months, it's becoming harder and harder to find the diamonds out of the large piles of dung."

      Why must you all blame the politics section? It is distinct from the tech page, you can ignore it completely. I don't see the politics people crossing over much into the tech section at all.

      Politics, economics and business/management go hand in hand with tech, it's silly to complain about them being here.

      I also wish they'd add a military tech section here.
    • HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3Yeah, yeah, yeah...

      I put the blog link in as a test.

      I'll publish my results of the test at a later date ;)
    • JangoFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I think the easiest way to fix this would be to change Digg so that the homepage will no longer show stories submitted by users you have blocked and/or prevent their Diggs from showing up in the Digg count of stories.
    • hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Civil discussion of Religion exists... Abh Nation is where I go, though there are probably other places.
      http://www.abhnation.com/ipbmb/index.php?showforum=15
    • plkrtn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Funny, as most of the top 30 are on your friends list...
    • heathuff2345, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18This story is completely true and I have proof to back it up....this story here:

      http://digg.com/software/Become_a_del_icio_us_Power_User

      was submitted by one of diggs "cult members"...it made the front page with less than 30 diggs and NO comments....I posted a comment about the submitter working in a 7-11 which offended him and 5 minutes later my account was banned for "misuse", so this proves hes one of diggs moderators and can easily push his stories to the front page-how sad
    • MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1@ bgoodknight

      It does not matter, Digg is democratic anyway since everyone is allowed to cast their vote on a story. I don't think it's a organized group of people, it's just a "group" of people that just happen to have the same interest and find the same stories interesting. Stop attacking Digg for not being democratic.
    • mcduckov, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Digg has been pwned by IRC geeks from the very start. We have all seen the herd mentality at work where a story gets dugg hundreds of times even though the site is down and no one could possibly be reading it. You just need some fairly small number of dedicated users organized in one place to all digg at the same time.

      Since these are probably IRC geeks I doubt anything Kevin will do won't be quickly countered by them through trial and error. The main problem, as I see it, is that it takes WAY too few diggs to promote a story. We have all seen stories promoted with less than 20 diggs. This is absurd. What they should be optimizing is the number of diggs it takes for promotion and not trying to outdo the gamers (people who, almost by definition, have no life but to game digg).

      I'd start with 275 diggs for a story to be promoted and go from there. If you are some clan of freaks that can get together 275 diggs then dammit you SHOULD make the frontpage. But 10, 20, 30 diggs to get there is just stupid.
    • ajcip2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Obviously there's a way to circumvent Digg's voting.

      Kevin Rose (kevinrose) has gotten 151 our of 151 stories on the frontpage. that's pretty good!

      Still gotta love Digg.
    • EmileVictor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Down with the bourgeoisie!
    • detonate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"This Account Has Been Suspended
      Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible."
      Which top digg is it that is throwing his toys? Anyone grab the text?
  • myfavatar, on 10/12/2007, -11/+38I like digg, but let's see if this story gets promoted to the front page.
    • snowbooch, on 10/12/2007, -58/+21dude whats with all the digg-drama...its just a f*cking website!!! a good one, but come on...you don't resign from a website you resign from a job

      these aritcles are just getting lame
    • NICU, on 10/12/2007, -35/+25Seriously people, its just a website. If you rely on Digg to get all of your information you're just lazy. Go find it yourself. If they change the algorithm that promotes stories and you throw a temper tantrum - grow up. If you want to cheat to get a story promoted - grow up. This is so lame I can't believe this many people actually care.
    • MrKite, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24Saying "it's just a website" doesn't go over very well on website that's "user-*****-driven". People have put a lot of time and effort (for free!) to make this website better, and their articles never get to the front page because of the exploits.

      It may be just a website to you because all you do is skim through the articles and post comments. There are a lot of people here that submit lots of interesting articles that won't make it to the front page because A) the application design of this site doesn't work, and B) because people are people.

      Maybe you should think before you spew your "I'm a grownup" mentality.
    • dsmero, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20I think digg has gone downhill too. I believe strongly that there is a "group" of individuals that control the content that gets passed along to the front page. That just defies the point of the idea of digg.
    • MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@ snowbooch

      Agree with you there. And it's lame how people just bury comments that does not fit them...
  • acoot, on 10/12/2007, -31/+11Why don't they come up with an algorithm that a first time digger get automatically put on the front page. Do you have any idea why netscape wanted to buy those top diggers in the first place? Its because of their loyalty and sense of duty. They can wake up at 4am just to submit a story... Kevin thats why.


    I still love digg :(
  • dankoleary, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19As someone that likes to digg through newly submitted stories, I've noticed this is a problem as well. It seems that if one of the top users comments on / digg's that story, it's a golden ticket to the front page.

    This change is necessary to remove the barriers for entry of new Diggers, that way they have access to joining the community without having to spend months gathering a cohort of friends. For those of you in the upper echelon, I wouldn't worry- your VOLUME of stories still will lead to front page activity.
    • 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15It is my belief that the move to rank contributors is the real problem. Remove the incentive to put oneself front and center, and you remove the problem as well.
    • LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Problem started with the politics section, among other non-tech related sections that are barely used, which brings nuts who want their views on the front page to justify their views. Getting back to tech, science, geek stuff, etc would push out the losers.
  • Popdmb, on 10/12/2007, -6/+72At one point in the article, it talks about Malkin being upset about users removing posts from each side. That's the way it should be. I don't bury Daily KOS, Malkin, LewRockwell, and ThinkProgress because they provide a new, fresh insight to politics. I bury them because 9/10 times they're either:

    a) poorly written
    b) propaganda
    c) wildly innaccurate

    If both sides cancel each other out, this is a good thing. Most people don't want to be subjected to headlines like "Hezbollah - The Heroes" or "Are Gay Marriages More Harmful than WMDs?"

    Techcrunch brings up good points about the top Digg users. But leave the burying system alone. It's one of the Digg's strongest assets.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14"At one point in the article, it talks about Malkin being upset about users removing posts from each side"

      When she stops forwarding Fox News propaganda directly to Digg on a daily basis maybe someone will give a damn.
    • LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I bury DailyKos and I'm a liberal (green really). You should too.
    • blindReticle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"If both sides cancel each other out, this is a good thing. Most people don't want to be subjected to headlines like "Hezbollah - The Heroes" or "Are Gay Marriages More Harmful than WMDs?"

      I love you.

      In a non gay marriage way.
  • Th3_anOmoLy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+40Seriously people. Digg is a news site. We're a community of people submitting stories for the betterment of said community. When the hell did this become a competition?

    Sure, I'll run a search every now and then to see where I fall in the list of "Top Digg Users". Admittedly the only reason I'm anywhere on (and not very high at that) the list is because I've been digging for a while now. It'd be cool to be higher on the list I guess, but it's not like the top user gets a prize. He/She isn't getting a cut of the ad-sense profits or anything. And I sure as hell am not going to stress myself trying to get there.

    In the last few days/weeks this stuff as erupted like crazy. I appreciate the top submitters because I don't have time to surf the net looking for news. Digg brings it all to my laptop screen. And of course I'm annoyed by blog spam, dupes, inaccurate stories and all that jazz just like everyone else. But you're going to find that crap anywhere on the web, I think most of us have been around the net enough to know that. And at the end of the day I have my news, some great laughs and a few bookmarked resources that I didn't have before.

    I guess that's the end of my rant. O_o
    • diligent1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+66Getting to digg front page is now a business model...
      Jesus, the bloody ad revenue from just getting one story front-paged is mind boggling.
      You could probably make a living at this.
    • dvranizan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18I think you underestimate just how bored some people are...
    • Bobski, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9It became a competition when a bunch of losers with no lives made it their job to wake up at 5:30 every morning to "work hard at making Digg a great site," thus circumventing the contributive community aspect of Digg.
    • pauleric, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4@diligent1, so what is the ad revenue from getting a front page story?
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"When the hell did this become a competition?"

      I sense the foul shadow of Jason Calacanis' foul hand in this.
    • RandomGuySteve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Since they started keeping score, apparently.
    • gypsi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4In a way Calacanis did have something to do with the top 10 dissatisfaction.

      By making his original offer, he planted a seed of discontent. He basically said to these people, "it's only you 10 who are valuable to me". He was offering financial benefit - money always makes things real. So whether or not it was there before, and obviously despite the fact that they didn't take hime up on his offer, these top users had external validation for their self-aggrandizing attitude. And in their minds, a community site like Digg would never be good enough unless these users were always at the "top", always the best and always treated like royalty. It had to be true, someone had flat out said so and put their money on the table to prove it.

      Don't believe me? Read P9's goodbye letter.
  • jayadelson, on 10/12/2007, -28/+15Isn't this a bit old already? I am a big fan of Mike's, but this seems like it is getting a bit sensational...I choose to stick to the original threads.
    • bluephoenix, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25This is getting old, but it had to be done. I truly miss what digg was and I think that after the smoke clears frmo this whole event, the content will get better due to a more diverse selection of stories. The friends digging friends variety of stories were mostly articles found via other RSS feeds (slashdot, engadget, nytimes, metafilter) We don't need these stories necessarily on the front page of digg too, unless it's groundbreaking news, and I speak only for the TECH section obviously, but that seems to still drive 80% of the traffic here so I believe it's relevant. I for one will wait to see what comes of this, and I hope it improves because I really enjoy this site and use it daily to stay ahead of the curve at work.
    • jayadelson, on 10/12/2007, -6/+40We have already implemented some technology, since the beginning, which works in this direction, we just can't get into specific details or it serves as a roadmap for gaming and abuse.

      It's a shame people aren't aware of how much the system already prevents these sort of things, or more importantly, how AMAZINGLY GREAT the users have been at burying stories that get past our algorithms.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"Isn't this a bit old already? I am a big fan of Mike's, but this seems like it is getting a bit sensational...I choose to stick to the original threads."

      It is, but lets not get caught up in the short attention span syndrome. Important movements fail to happen because people get bored of hearing about it a day later.
    • bluephoenix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I think we are aware of the improvements, but speaking form someone that has been here for a bit I think it's safe to say that there has been a noticeable decline in really cool stories on the tech homepage. At least I find that I bookmark a lot less these days. I may be in the minority these days but I'm involved in the web design / database / multimedia field, and I used to find excellent content here on a daily basis. I'm happy for the success of the site don't get me wrong..business is business..and I realize the site will never be like it used to (mostly because of it's popularity which is inevitable) ..I just want to continue to use it and participate, so I think these changes will eventually help keep the foundation of users that made this site what it is today.
    • bluephoenix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7One last comment....I really believe that technology should remain the central focus to seperate digg from the clone sites that have srpung up and will continue to appear. In reality the only difference these days between digg, netscape, reddit, newsvine is that I only TRUST digg for tech news. That was the foundation of the site and it will be the reason the site continues to prosper. It almost reminds me of the whole Tech TV/G4 TV fiasco, in which a small but incredibly relevant niche becomes overwhelmed by expanding it's content base to gear towards a wider audience, and in the end loses it's unique quality, alienates it's user base and ultimately gets lost in the pack. I hope that never happens here but I get the sense that it might. Regardless, thanks for addressing the issue anyways.
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I'm not part of the "gaming group" if you will, but I have noticed that a certain group of my friends ALWAYS digg a storry I submit no matter what it is. I mean come on, I know I'm not THAT great. I've also checked into their friends and noticed they've done the same for all of them.

      I think that this is all actually part of a larger debate about weigting the influence of users. If you want to talk about news governance, I think it is quite apt to compare digg and slashdot; slashdot being a highly regulated republic, and digg being a full democracy.

      I think that if digg is to continue being relavant and sharp, then the pendulum needs to swing the other way a little bit. n00b users need to be treated as such until they have proven their chops. People who commit thoughtful discussion and popular stories should be rewarded with more influence.

      The old saying goes that not everyone should vote. I think digg is proving that.
    • NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15In this situation, I think Digg worked, and worked well.

      The whole idea is that it's a site for the users to make their own. In this way, a large number of the contributing community (believe it or not, there is more than one way to contribute to digg BESIDES submitting stories, although admittedly, that is the base of it all... Despite the 500,000 members, I don't think I've ever seen a story with more than 2000 diggs in my time here - only 4 months or so - so there's a large population that just clicks links, without digging, without commenting) made known that they had taken notice that a small group of users was beginning to dominate the front page. Articles on the subject were submitted... A few were buried, while one survived. All ended up with inaccuracy tags, which is within the right of those digg users who didn't believe the story.

      The truth of the matter is, Digg's algorithm, like all programming, is inorganic, structured, and with enough time, effort, cooperation and experimentation can be mapped and discovered, no matter how secret Kevin keeps it. Occasionally, it needs adjustments. The outcry was enough that Kevin decided it was prudent to do something about it.

      I originally considered ditching digg, but I think I'm going to stick around and continueto watch for a little while longer. As I noticed what people were saying about multiple front-page stories by one user was true (a big hint was when digitalgopher's personal icon changed from the low-contrast, nondescript transformer into the high-contrast, yellow and black radioactive symbol - it became a great deal more visible... most of the time I don't even notice submitters) and I realized digg had become the domain of a select few instead of a large community, I felt a great disappointment. Regardless of whether or not this is a true conspiracy, none can deny that a large number of front-page stories were submitted by this small group of users. I felt that Digg had become no different than a moderated site, where an exclusive group controls the content. Therefore, these users, who may have been totally legitimate, and felt they were doing Digg a service, had ruined Digg for me. The idea that a person can register one day, submit a story that has a well-written headline and summary, and then see their story hit the front page the next day is very alluring.

      So, I'm not bothered by the fact that high-profile users are deciding to leave. Personally, I think Digg has no lack of content, good or bad. Digg will not suffer from their loss, and for a time, I think, it will stand truly on the community alone. I have no doubt that other users will replace these eventually, and maybe we will see those users deposed and frustrated as well. But if that's the way it has to be, then that's how it goes.

      If any of you read p9's commentary, addressing the fact that he was leaving, it's clear from the tone of his comment that he had taken his high ranking to mean that he was more valuable to digg than other users. This is where part of the problem lies, I think. It merely meant that he submitted more, and got more promoted stories than other users. That's all. As those numbers grew, so did his noteriety. So did his digg ego. The fact of the matter is that digg supercedes the user. And if part of healing digg means these top users stop contributing, then so be it. Let digg build up again on what it was founded for - user submitted content, for the sake of the community.

      Long Live Digg!
    • valour, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"We have already implemented some technology, since the beginning, which works in this direction, we just can't get into specific details or it serves as a roadmap for gaming and abuse."

      Oh, fabulous -- security by obscurity! Hasn't Microsoft given you enough proof that "if I keep the code secret, we'll all be safe" is a terrible way to write software? Rest assured, someone, somewhere will find out how to game the system again (sooner rather than later) and will secretly use it to get their lame blog posts to the front page. You won't notice it until enough people are pissed off to the point that they visit less. I think you need to re-think your approach to software development.
    • ShiverMeBoner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@jay,

      "We have already implemented some technology, since the beginning, which works in this direction, we just can't get into specific details or it serves as a roadmap for gaming and abuse."

      Following Microsoft's model of security through obscurity has been proven not to work. Keeping users from 'gaming' the system by keeping things secret is NOT the solution.

      Why? Because a few people will figure it out by themselves. Then you'll have a handful of people exploiting things, and gaming the system. Most people will be unaware that these exploits are possible, and then you will be right in the situation you see yourself in now.
    • jayadelson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I don't agree re: Microsoft, totally unfair comparison. Fighting spammers and hackers, as ANY large community site will tell you, is an arms race.

      You're not here sitting on this side making code changes each week to stop the abusers, so its not exactly something easy to communicate. However, we don't want to destroy transparency either. We will work hard on making our process more transparent (vs. our anti-gaming technology) and I think that will satisfy most of everyone's concerns.
    • napkinback, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Fighting spammers and hackers, as ANY large community site will tell you, is an arms race."

      Yeah, it's an arms race, one you've made us, the users, your weapon in fighting. All of us that aren't spammers, that bury stupid crap, that digg the gems, we're the ones who are the weapon used to bludgeon the dregs of Digg.

      I'm background noise on Digg, one of those people who comments every other week, submits a couple stories a year, diggs a few times a day for a story that really looks good. I don't have time to sift through thousands of submissions, I don't have a huge network of friends. How do you make digg equitable to a user like me?

      You can't, it's not conceivable. You would have to severely penalize heavy users to reach for some sort of "level ground". I'm not advocating that either, by the way, but pointing out the absurdity of the democratic ways of digg. Democracy on Digg, as in the real world, is controlled by those with power. Any system can be gamed, any system can be controlled. So, yes, it's an arms race, but just as I will continue to get hundreds of spam message a week to my email, do Digg will always have users who can game the system.

      Give us the tools to expose those people. Tell us what the algorithm is and then let us ostracize those that game the system; the anti-friend or whatever. I'd take more notice of someone who had been anti-friended than someone with hundreds of friends. Hell, I'd anti-friend anyone who made diggnation as a rule.
    • lane.montgomery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The comparison to Microsoft is unfair. It is more like comparing them to Google. You see what happened to Google's search results whenever people started figuring out the page rank algorithm.

      Stuff like that probably is better kept secret to keep the experience better for the rest of us.
  • fudgebrown, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23I use digg as a resource, and it's a great tool. I see no merit in P9s comments. I wish him well, but hope users see more in digg, and not create superiority complexes within themselves. Sure it can be fun to compete and grow your ranking, but we must all adapt to the rules - or leave.
    • adjustafresh, on 10/12/2007, -8/+43Maybe "P9" will actually get a life now instead of devoting all of his time to Digg.

      It's a website people.
    • itanshi, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3p9? he was number 2 before. he is just now #1 with the resign. so maybe you are miss aiming or i am uninformed? i don't even see his posts on here to comment on.
    • itanshi, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1ok modd my couple posts down on p9, i am corrected
    • Popdmb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Maybe "P9" will actually get a life now instead of devoting all of his time to Digg."

      http://neothoughts.com/2006/09/07/diggs-top-user-says-goodbye/

      I guess you were right.
    • stuartm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9P9 definitely needs to take a hard look at his life if he's that invested in something that in reality does nothing but make money for another group of people. I'm sure it's great to be #1 and in a lot of ways that's the genius of Digg - the business is driven on humans' innately competitive nature.
    • d2nd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3maybe P9 isnt spending 12hrs a day digging, maybe its an account on a semipublic computer that alot of people use. (wishful thinking)
    • tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I really don't think it's fair at all to sit here slamming P9 for what he chooses to do with his time. Who are you to judge him? How do you know what quality of life he may have? Besides, the issue is the way in which stories are promoted, not the quantity of stories submitted in the first place. In fact, that's a benefit, not a problem - it gives us all more choice.

      Your comments take the arguments of the past few days in a new direction, and I for one don't think it's appropriate. Critisise the system, not the people.
    • gypsi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3tizz66, you might have a point if that prima-donna didn't come on here in probably the most pathetic fashion I've ever seen from a site admin. He slammed both Digg users and management both and pretty much flat out screamed that Digg had owed him something. That's not talk you expect from a peer user.
  • spoonyluv, on 10/12/2007, -24/+7The ony think that hurts digg is the fact that there are always 4-5 stories on the front page about digg. Self reporting news sites are useless.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24Then maybe Digg should setup some forums, so people can talk about the site, without having to write an article and submit it.
  • josegutz, on 10/12/2007, -19/+5Digg Rigged Bigg, you digg? I don't .
  • CryptoFuseBox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I'm not sure if I care that a story that I submitted gets prompted to the front page. What I care about is that enough people read it and it adds value to the overall community. That is why I love the Digg model. There are enough people out there who want there to be a controversy with Digg - but the reality is that the Digg network model is more likely to work than most other models. I liked Kevin's post on the Digg blog and I like the changes and the updates that came around as a result of these news articles. Hey, this post made it to the front page - and that's how I dugg it. At the end of the day, there are always going to be those who try to game the system to promote their posts - but Digg will continue to evolve and innovate. That's why we're all here in the first place.
    Digg Rocks - and you all know it!!
  • Twinked, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32*****, I read digg to pass the day. I could careless who has the most stories. If I want real news I'll jump to a news site. Digg isn't a news site anymore. It's a popularity contest. I've submitted some cutting edge news and got buried in a heart beat. No worries though, I just quit trying to contribute to the site. Let the popular ones rule what the rest of us see.
    • LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Too much like Netscape. Dump the politics and business sections in favor for tech, science, and geek interests.
  • dWhisper, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1I almost feel the need to make a blog post that reads along the line of "Diig is rigged: Who cares? Small group of people, not millions of users." Then I should submit it, and see if I can bribe this small group to promote it.
  • bertram, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4another day, another TechCrunch article on the front page. whoopie.
  • Qtip42, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2I'm glad jay is responding in here but this article on tech crunch says nothing new. Is everyone going to keep harping on the same stuff?
  • bvizzle, on 10/12/2007, -62/+2I control digg!























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































    you





















































































































































































































































    don't



























































































































    !
  • thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4this is stupid, the algorithm is what it is and it isn't bad.

    something most of the people complaining the loudest is that those with the most power on digg have it for a reason. WE GAVE IT TO THEM
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22"WE GAVE IT TO THEM"

      Not really. They gave it to themselves, which is half the point people are trying to make.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24The problem with the algorithm is that it elevates users with more stories put on the front page over everyone else. It kind of makes sense, but it doesn't take into account the gaming of the system these users are doing. The current algorithm is akin to getting more votes in a presidential election simply because you voted for more winners in the past than the next guy.

      Also, I'm trying to figure out what p9 is upset about. Think about this: why would he be angry at the new algorithm?

      The new algorithm examines the diversity of articles you've dugg. If the majority of stories you digg are by those in your friends list, then your digg has less power. The story still can get to the front page, but it requires a more diverse digging. This is completely fair.

      So why would P9 be upset? The only logical explanation is that he in fact knows he's gaming the system, and wants to continue. If he was truly interested in the spirit of this site, then he wouldn't mind the fact that people will less "clout" than him get a better chance of making the front page.
    • wistar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The ramjet approach: the faster you go the faster you go.
  • 0v3rk1ll, on 10/12/2007, -22/+6Digg is becoming yet another Apple-sponsored site. It's always iMac, OS X, Apple, Jobs that get to the front page.
    • plkrtn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19If thats what people digg, then thats what people digg.
      However, if groups of people are organising themselves around digging the same articles, then you have to welcome a new algorithm that will stop "gaming".
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4Ubuntu too
    • CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2I haven't seen a crappy Apple or Linux story since I took them off my watch list. It really is worth doing because it would take me a long time to block all the fanboys out there. This way I block them all in one click.
    • armbar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I usually go through once a day to bury around 75% of the stories in the Apple category. Most of it's because they're either inaccurate, or dupes. In the last couple days, there've been probably 35-40 rehashes of "what's going to happen on Sept. 12th!!!" Others are spammy blogs, usually.

      I don't have anything against Macs, I'm just tired of the useless fanboy arguments and stupidity of most of the Apple stories. Just trying to reduce the noise so other diggers can hear the signal.
  • mobilehavoc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The thing is, if Digg is rigged as it seems sometimes then it's no different than any other news aggregator on the internet so you could use them instead with the same results.
    • JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Digg is just another source of information. One of many and not necessarily any better or any worse than any other. It's possible that the digg community has better insight on a given issue than editors at the New York Times ... but the reverse is also possible.
  • Ehrgeiz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28Since these guys started this the content and quality of digg has gone way down. I've been reading since it opened and right now its the same crap on the front page by the same people every day.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24"Since these guys started this the content and quality of digg has gone way down. I've been reading since it opened and right now its the same crap on the front page by the same people every day."

      True. And if you really look into their histories, you'll see a lot of their front page stories have less than 500 diggs, some with much less, and only around 30 comments. What's that mean? It means the better part of the community isn't enjoying their stories, and the stories are only on the front page because of their friends system.
  • plkrtn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16There is nothing new here. It happens all the time in the Internet world. A cult product has to expand, and some people, including some of the top diggers take offense because it will directly impact them. Most people, including myself will consider themselves lucky to get one digg when they submit something that interests them, but obsessive diggers will go out of their way to constantly post on here, content which they don't care about. Why? Because its a popularity contest to them, and when they are stopped from taking over the asylum, they get offended.
    Its no different to when Valve release Counter-Strike updates, and some people say "stuff the newbies, I want the game I love", or "whats all this anti-cheat stuff, i love wall hacks!" The majority of people don't like change, but its a fact of life the few of us who do like change live with, and realise is going to happen whether I like it or not.

    So the guy who dominates digg isn't digging anymore... Great, more space for people to be able to post their articles and get to the front page, without super-geeky little cliques taking over the place.
  • isthisme2, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7What??? digg is perfect??? Perhaps it will make everyone feel better if they slap a beta tag on the logo..

    Keep up the good work on improving Digg.
  • Lumiras, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4I'm sorry, but that's the nature of the site. The more attentive users are going to control the front page due to the fact that they submit more stories.

    What do these people want? Every story makes it to the front page?
    • tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Submitting a huge number of stories is fine, I don't think anyone is critisising that aspect of digg. If someone has the time to submit 200 stories a day, that's great for the rest of us because it gives us more choice of reading. The issue is what gets promoted and why. If all of those 200 stories get promoted because they're all superb, that's fine, and no-one would have a problem. It 200 stories get promoted because a top user submitted it, but only (say) 50 are worthwhile... then you see the problem Digg has. It's not about the quantity, it's about the quality control.
  • Peepsalot, on 10/12/2007, -16/+5From TFA: "The incredibly successful news site Digg has hit a few speed bumbs recently."

    What the ***** is a speed bumb. I pretty much stopped reading at that point. Spellcheck please.
    • tHePeOPle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9yet you continue to read digg...
    • d2nd, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3you dont know what a speed bump is?

      2 parts meth + 1 part coke = speed bump
  • joshwalderbach, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22I agree with Whitey. I have been visiting Digg for about a year now and I think the quality and diversity of stories has gone down alot. I don't care that Kevin laser engraved his laptop nor did I find it educational. I don't care about a Letterman episode that aired 15 years ago. What happened to the bleeding edge tech stories and the heads up on awesome tech deals? Anymore it seems most stories are links to someones YouTube account or another top 10 must have firefox/wordpress/insert your proggie here plugins.

    The quality of DIggnation has also gone way down. Besides the Russian dog head story, I haven't been mildly interested in a single story they cover in several weeks. I think the novelty has worn off for these guys. It was fun when it was just a small group of nerds posting stories but now that the masses use it, like anything else the masses touch, it went to *****.
    • d2nd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I agree, diggnation has gone to hell. I removed it from my feed after hearing the "response" to the digggames issue. the "thats just the way it is" attitude was simply *****.
    • DisposableRob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You know, you can remove topics you aren't interested in.
  • D14BL0, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Supernova's probably just Kevin in disguise.
  • dwayne.sellers, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11OK! Reality check folks.

    First, digg is a news site based on the input of the masses. Second, sometimes the masses are lazy or have other things to do, as in have a life. Third, there are people in this world that will take a good thing and rip out all the "good intentions" and use it mainly to promote themselves or their agenda. Fourth, there are also people who will do the same for money, hmmmm. Fifth, long lists of numbered comments probably annoy people but make for a cheap thrill to someone who enjoys tweaking those with small attention spans. Sixth, Kevin and the others have a delicate balance to maintain. They get wasted for not showing digg stories, and then two comments later get lambasted for showing too many. It is a line that most people could only walk with help of medication or a guide dog. Where are we, oh yeah, Seventh, if you do not want to digg or think you should be patted on the back for it, move along. Contributing usually involves giving for the greater good. It does not generally involve giving to receive a ranking which will lead to monetary prizes or a fan boy tag within said community. Move along to Netscape. They go for that type thing. We will wait for your replacement with less than bated breath.

    Jay, Kevin and the guys, keep doing what you do. The fact you still try and make things better is an example of how much you all care. Now go cash your check and burn a few hundreds lighting your cigars. Or at least send me a shirt for contributing : )
  • gookie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Ahhh....I miss the digg of the yester years...
  • ZeroG52, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36"...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."

    Core users? I thought this was a community, not a group of "core" users. This guy is so full of himself he seems to feel that Digg would not be here without these nerds that sit in front of their computer all day long submitting stories form their mother's basement. It really sounds to me like this guy has no life outside of the machine at all, and that makes me very sad for him. This IS his life and he feels that the community betrayed him. Unfortunately, his practices of trying to monopolise the system backfired upon him, and I feel that the Digg site as a whole will be better off without this "core" group of users.
    • MisterCookie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Agreed, if its a 'democratically moderated news site', how the heck does one guy have so much influence?
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30Logically, the only reason p9 is offended is because he knows what he's doing. He sits and posts thousands and thousands of stories on Digg, and acts like him and his loser posse are the only reason Digg is around. Seriously, does he not realize that Digg would be exactly the same (if not better) without him? Doesn't he realize that all he does is sniff out OTHER news stories, and that 99.99% of the time, another one of Digg's half million users will find it? This guy seriously overestimates his importance.

      p9 can cry a ***** river if he wants to, but he's got to realize that Digg owes him nothing, and us users owe him nothing. No one forced him to waste his life on this site, and no one forced him to help rig the system. He calls submitting to Digg "busting [his] ass." How about you get a real job pal, and find out the meaning of busting your ass?
    • itanshi, on 10/12/2007, -15/+3again, p9 was #2 before. #1 resigned which makes p9 #1 now. is your information accurate?
    • HarryBauzonia, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24He makes me think of those Korean kids who kill themselves over video games. P9 needs to go on a camping trip and get himself a hooker.

      Resign from a website? Hah hah freakin' hah.
      Loser.
    • gypsi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I've seen this again and again over the years. Being an active user is one thing (99.9% of the top 1000 Digg users would fit into this category) - but you have to surpass a whole new level of obsessive behavior to achieve "elite" status on any message board the way people like P9 did. I'm not saying these are bad people, this is just behavior you see all the time. And nobody kid themselves - nobody engages in this type of behavior to kill time here and there, it's simply an obsession to get to and stay at the top - and everybody has to know it. Read P9's farewell comment, and this bears out like so many before him.
  • ttntyler, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Hmm, people are taking this site too seriously

    Get outside people
    • Ehrgeiz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I'd love to "Get outside" but I can't I'm stuck at work and to help pass the time Digg is well was a wonderful place for all kinds of tech stories. Now its good but not nearly as good as it used to be before the "CJ" group started thier crap.
    • Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"Get outside people"

      It's frickin' cold. And raining! And I'm tired from another hard work day, and I use to rather feel like getting outside tomorrow when it's Friday.
  • Timt775, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10When did it become a life or death situation to get on the front page? Is this a game site or a news site? Is this a competition? Do we get some reward for being on the front? Enjoy adding to the community, not trying to dominate it. Otherwise, there will soon be clans forming that will start to digg down stories of other clans and promote stories that were submitted by their clan. Bots will start popping up for auto digging. Stupidity.

    There is a reason why Digg is different from other social networking sites... it's the maturity and quality of the users and the information submitted... or used to be.
    • LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Clans?! Sweet. Now is the time for Clan Bloke! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
  • j00fek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3would be nice if most of the people that submit, get recognition for it.
  • jjallday, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I don't understand what the big deal is about tweaking the algorithm and why people are unhappy about it. Digg users are smart, they'll inevitably figure out the system and intentionally or not, beat it.

    It's a similar phenomenon to GoogleRank. People figure out, they change it...rinse and repeat.
  • mapkinase, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10It is very sad that Techcrunch is referencing this person that should be simply ignored:

    "Political blogger Michelle Malkin was one of the first to complain..."
    • joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7What does Malkin have to do with the 'truth'?
  • Matt2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Why don't they just get rid of the "Top X profiles" page entirely. Lots of message forums do that too, when compu-nerds start jockeying for #1 top poster position.

  • gabacho, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11You mean democratic systems can be overrun by a group of ambitious, powerful people, regardless of the opinion of the general constituency? Who knew.

    Kinda like another democratic system I know
    • heresy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You and your politically charged comments are the bane of digg.
  • Soulhuntre, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6"We have already implemented some technology, since the beginning, which works in this direction, we just can't get into specific details or it serves as a roadmap for gaming and abuse."

    Don't we hear the OSS crowd whine incessantly about how silly "security through obscurity" is supposed to be? :)
    • LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Actually, OSS has better security through competent programming.
  • FishPoisonCon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12does anyone else see the pattern... good website gets popular, turns to crap.
    • rhizome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Obviously the only solution to this tragedy is for websites to start out crappy.
  • MacGyver2210, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Well, if this isn't just the uber and ultra of ***** publicity stunts.

    No digg for pure attention-whorism.
  • Sirocco, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Cool. We brought up a point and the head guru responded in the Digg blog. Not only that, but we've been promised an algo change to make this less of a problem.

    The stories landing on the front page are getting less and less diggs (dramatically so), indicating that content is hitting the front page that, not surprisingly, few people are really interested in. If that isn't an indicator of ballot stuffing via the friend system, nothing is.
  • codethief, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Am I missing something? Ok so I'm new to Digg but who cares who brings up the stories as long as they're interesting?!!
    • cma3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@ codethief

      "Am I missing something? Ok so I'm new to Digg but who cares who brings up the stories as long as they're interesting?!!"

      Because you are new I will put it to you this way:

      Imagine that all these "interesting" stories that you mention are no longer interesting? Add to that the fact that these "interesting" stories are only being put out by a select few.

      You then attempt to submit an "interesting" story, and what happens? It gets instantly buried.

      Finally, have this issue happen to you over and over and over again....and maybe now you see the problem.

      Welcome to Digg, we hope that you will stick around and become an active member of OUR community.
    • xenuxenuts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So are you saying these people are not only digging stories by their friends, but burying stories by non-friends just because they're non-friends? It seems simple to fix to me.. detect and make their buries worthless and their diggs next to worthless.

      The other option would be public humiliation: Make their user names public. Have a Digg Hall of Lame.
  • mage1129, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3Digg is a democracy plain and simple, everyone gets one vote. If these people are hijacking digg then identify them and stop digging their stories. Don't look to Kevin to stop this nonsense, because we have just as much power by deciding as individuals. If you think that members x,y,z are controlling the front page then use your vote against them. What is so difficult? This is Digg the majority will eventually decide the course, small groups will pop up but unless their vote becomes more then one vote then therer shouldn't be a problem. And as far as the number 1 digger leaving good riddance, he isn't anymore digg then anyone else.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"Digg is a democracy plain and simple, everyone gets one vote."

      Wrong. If most good theories are correct, then Digg works on a karma system that gives the diggs from some users more weight than the diggs from other users. i.e. some people get 2 votes, or 3 votes, etc. Among some other things, that's part of the problem that people are addressing.
  • reeder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Digg needs randomized pages (maybe as the default front page), along with the popular, that account for already listed articles as to provide fresh content.

    Beyond this, Digg will have to continually revamp its code to prevent exploitation of the digg system. Or say ***** it, either one.
  • asorenson470, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think digg is great, those that are just digging each others story are taking away the point of digg this is not supposed to be in my opinion a site about picking your friends ideas its supposed to be about interesting news and articles to make you more tech savvy and and savvy to the world around you based on what other people thought was a good thing to spend some time on.Shame on anyone who is promoting making digg anything that it was not meant to be, and tainting it. I really do love digg.
  • jlunski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8People need to stop making Digg their life's blood, if you see an interesting story great, post it, but quit submitting stuff just to "see your name up in lights". I've only been reading Digg for a few months and I can tell even in that short amount of time the quality of posts has seemed to have dwindled. People need to realize that Digg is not MySpace 2.0, I come here for the content, I am less concerned with who found the content, not that they shouldn't get credit but to me that's not what Digg is about or at least shouldn't be what Digg is about.
  • computerdave, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I see this change as only a positive thing, all you whining people need to spend more time away from this website. I check-in a few times a day to see what's been added; read a handful; digg the ones I like. As was said earlier being the top digger isn't a competition being supported by anyone that I've heard of, why is that spot so coveted. Woop-de-doo, stop taking yourself so seriously.
    I don't live on the East coast and I see many of these stories way after they've been posted/dugg to the front page; I also don't submit anything because by the time I read it on it's home site it's already been submitted to digg by someone who is on the East coast or read it earlier than I was even awake.
    I'll stay because I find plenty of articles that I wouldn't otherwise see, and in this case if it's something I have something to say I say it.
  • TripleNipple, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The problem is not enough people digg the stories they read. I am not sure what the read to digg click ratio is, but if more people dugg the stories this wouldn't be an issue.
    • chabuhi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hmmm ... you mean, like a two-minute timer before the user can digg or bury a story after they've clicked the story link? Doesn't guarantee that they read the story, but ... I don't know, achieves what you're looking for (forgetting, for the moment, the other problems such a feature might provoke).
  • dmann, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The real problem is that they're not promoting MY pod cast. If they would do that, I wouldn't have a problem with them...

    (Note: Digg is also without a designated "sarcasm font" so people know not to take comments like this seriously.)
  • rpn700, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Every quarter the top 25 diggers or whatever number could lose that ability for the following three months.
  • tagnarth, on 10/12/2007, -17/+3BLAH BLAH ***** BLAH
    Digg is still running rather well and tons of good news makes it to the front page regularly. Quite ***** whining and grow up.
    God reminds me of slashdot
    • Ninjaneer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I strongly disagree...I've actually lost to desire to come to Digg as of late. Everytime I check out the homepage, about 90% of it doesn't appeal to me. I know that's simply my opinion, though.
    • databasecowboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3...didn't slashdot get to this point and had to introduce moderation and then revamp it's moderation program and introduce meta-moderation... exactly the things digg supposedly was against.

      I've always had this hunch that the main diggers were digg 'employees' who were hanging out in one room running the show.

      Then again, so what, it's been a good show.
    • armbar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1God doesn't remind me at all of Slashdot...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 132 discussions
  •  

    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.