What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
320 Comments
- inactive, 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. - 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. - 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. - 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. - 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. - inactive, 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. - 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. - 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.
- 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/ - 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. - 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. - 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. - 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. - 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 - 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.
- 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? - 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.
- myfavatar, on 10/12/2007, -11/+38I like digg, but let's see if this story gets promoted to the front page.
- 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.
- CharlesDarwin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30I just wish they could remember my comment threshold is NOT 'sort by date (-4 diggs or higher)'
- 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. - 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. - 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.
- 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. - m00kie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25Mark this day on your calendar, folks. This is the day when the division between Digg’s top 100 users and the other 499,900 users was pushed far enough for Kevin Rose to actually weigh in on the issue. The result? User p9s50W5k4GUD2c6 has said goodbye to Digg.
HA HA HA ... Later douchebag - kungPow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22that's like protesting the iraq war by changing your socks
- 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.
- 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.
- 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. - 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. - 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. - 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 *****. - fishsoda, on 10/12/2007, -9/+30@HMTKSteve
While we are still complaining about things....
Thanks for spamming your blog *****. - mockstar, on 10/12/2007, -21/+42If anything, I don't think there's *enough* drama here.
- 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. - inactive, 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.
- inactive, 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. - 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". - dvranizan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18I think you underestimate just how bored some people are...
- ToddPM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17I see absolutely no reason to track stories by which user submitted them. None. And absolutely no reason to rank users. Stories should be submitted anonymously by users and get promoted to the front page if they get attention or kept away from the front page if they're marked as lame/inaccurate/spam or simply don't attract enough attention.
I'm being serious here. Can someone explain to me the value of recording which user submitted which story and how many diggs they get? - 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 - MisterCookie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Agreed, if its a 'democratically moderated news site', how the heck does one guy have so much influence?
- 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.
- Canuk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15The problem is the ranking system its self. I don't pay less income tax because I vote in every election. This is supposed to be an editorless system but by having a ranking system based on number of diggs we are basically electing an editor.
I say anonymous submissions and digging. - 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.
- 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! - 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. - Zoglog, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Great Response from Kevin Rose. I love how p9s50W5k4GUD2c6 turns into a little pouty bitch because they want to make the Digg system more fair to the masses instead of his little buddy train which has probably helped him read #1. Poor baby isn't going to get his cookie anymore... awwww =p
-
Show 51 - 100 of 321 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is