Comments on: So Called Top Digg Users Cry About Digg Changes

By: thinkdeep

thinkdeep — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:03:31 +0000

I don’t know what the “new” rules are or what the “old” rules were. Digg.com implied a democratization of news stories. A vote, if you will. In television, that has brought us Brittney and Paris on the nightly “News”. Digg.com is not any more sacred. Vote with a click of the mouse, or vote with click of the TV remote, if the people make bad choices what the hell does it mater?

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:37:36 +0000

The whole premise of Digg.com is based on competition and the mob mentality. Who needs it? StumbleUpon makes far more sense: it has categories that reflect a much broader range of interests; all submitters are treated exactly alike; and it’s damn difficult to game — too many stumbles of the same site from a given IP, and you’re SOL. For sharing links in the sidebar of my blog, I use del.icio.us and Google Reader, which are very good for that. But Digg? Nobody but the big sites can even handle being dugg without going down. Digg is useless as tits on a boar hog.

By: joffff

joffff — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:51:29 +0000

Hopefully this will see a return to the digg good times where stories that are really of interest get dugg and make it to the front page.

The “inner circle” of diggers have had it their way for too long and the site has suffered for it, forcing users to find alternative social bookmarking/news websites.

By: herbi4

herbi4 — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:19:42 +0000

Why are you guys don’t solve problem instead of talking about the problem? Why don’t we find out who these elites are and bury them? I know, its not worth it to become a monster to kill a monster. As matter of fact, I found out by tracing comments who supposedly bury my article but I don’t wanna to become like them.

Thank you Kevin Rose for helping with new algorithm. Your timing is just about right thinking how as a product Digg is becoming so popular and many people’s live may depend on Digg, but your competition is out there lurking.

By: nfxfsx

nfxfsx — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:55:25 +0000

I never did like Digg. Seemed like a giant waste of time and a bunch of idiots running the show.

By: SV

SV — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:50:36 +0000

@ R. You make yourself a little clearer now. At the end of all of it, the people at the top whinge about the same thing as the people at the bottom. It’s human nature. Everyone wants to protect their relevance. Some people fight to gain relevance, others to retain it. Survival of the fittest, perhaps? Regardless, I am all for voting with your feet (or hands in this regard) then making a public episode. If someone does not like what a commercial business does, then don’t buy/trade with them? People should be thankful they have “made hay while the sun shines”: they’ve manipulated the system.. just move onto another one. Simply, “shit, or get off the toilet” and stop whining.

(oh and the middle class in me screams “those terrible elitists, they work the system too easily (wish I could)” while the trying-to-appreciate-being-up-the-top-coming-from-the-middle-class says to me “those unfortunate middle and low class people, they have not yet earned their way to the top”)

By: Bjorn

Bjorn — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 01:18:38 +0000

ya those Digg “elites” are retarded. I’ve been using digg for about a year but never actually had an account. As soon as I saw that they had a petition against digg and one user commented “What happens if the most powerful users in the community decide to leave? Will others join? Is Digg anything without us?” I immediately signed up for a digg account. Fucking douche bags

By: midori01

midori01 — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:27:25 +0000

I really think that Digg is trying too hard to make the site very complex and hard to navigate. I prefer del.icio.us. My second choice would be: Diigo bookmarking. These are way easier to use.

By: Penrose W. Rimjob Esq.

Penrose W. Rimjob Esq. — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:12:23 +0000

Well the elites have a bit up on the average Joe-Digger,I have posted stories 4 and 5 hours before some of the “elite” only to have mine die on the vine, the elite post hits front page PDQ.Some of the elite posts are good, others ,as has been said before, cater to a niche group, but still make it front page, due only to the poster.In fact, 2 stories I posted linked directly to the original content, while the elites, a quick pass though their blog,traffic games I see.I have been a member for just over a year, a lurker for a year beyond that.I have seen what happens here, and it has just about ran its course for me, this fix to the algorithm, had better even the playing field.

By: R

Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:11:16 +0000

I’m not an elitist type, I don’t even use digg. I just think people are harping on the “elites” a bit much. I mean, they’re not asking for special recognition, compensation, or things to keep the “non-elites” down. They’re simply upset that a special handicap is placed on them in order to encourage the newer ones. Is there no other way to help out the newer ones than to penalize those who have worked their way up? The demands for transparency aren’t unreasonable, transparency is very often a positive thing. (And when I say champion sprinter, he was the prior champion before the race, sorry for any confusion.)