So Called Top Digg Users Cry About Digg Changes

For years there has been a small group of Digg users who think they control the digg community. Kevin Rose has posted a blog about the recent changes to the algorithm that will change the future of digg and the small community that controls it.

“Digg’s promotional algorithm ensures that the most popular content dugg by a diverse, unique group of diggers reaches the home page. Our goal is to give each person a fair chance of getting their submission promoted to the home page. Since Digg began more than three years ago, we’ve constantly been making tweaks to the promotional algorithm and will continue to do so. Most of our additions go unnoticed, and others take a few days to normalize as we watch them run live on the site. We spend a lot of time analyzing the data and improving the system.

These people have even been so bold as to come out with an outright “Open Letter To Digg” that is intended to TELL DIGG how to run their own site. An overview of the main points found in this open letter are as follows:

  • Lack Of Digg Communication: These “Top Users” these Digg elites think that digg reports to them, that Digg is somehow accountable to the user community.Look if 10% or more of the front page articles are controlled by 20-30 people that is a big problem and I comment Digg for “fixing” their algorithm. I attended this so-called “Live Protest” of and they believe they are so important that Digg will go away with out them.
  • Unexplained Banning Of Digg Users if your account is being banned chances are you are violating the TOS of the website which allows you the privileged of posting on their website. If you sit arround and ONLY digg your friend’s posts there is a problem, if new users must bow down and kiss your behind just to get a front page ranking there is a problem.
  • Manual Editing the last concern of these so-called “top diggers” is that has employed manual editors who are deranking their submissions because Digg has something against them.

Its amazing that these people think they built, here is a reality check you DID not build digg. If I am not mistaken Kevin Rose built There is a reality here you must accept, if MOST webmasters feel that they are unable to receive a front page digg because of “illegal” rings like yours then there is a problem. Digg needs to expand the webmaster base that can submit articles and still hope to hit the front page.

So in conclusion, there are other important websites besides yours, there is other VERY important information to be read on besides yours. This community desperately needs to reach out to the general webmaster community and offer a fair opportunity to all, new and old Digg users alike.

23 Responses to So Called Top Digg Users Cry About Digg Changes

  1. Vel says:

    Good, I’m sick of elitist prickbags running arounf through life with their heads held high and their cocks perpetually hard cause they are used to controlling what hits the front page of Digg because they managed to make a bunch of attantion starved psycophants drink their coolaid.

  2. Petr Buben says:

    how about giving articles approval/qiality ratings points – diggs
    1-10, or 1-5.
    And letting people know how many new diggs to certain articles
    since the last visit. /if I understand the system well. I just started/

  3. L says:

    Amen to this! I am so sick of Digg being nothing but “Marijuana should be legalized”, “People who believe in God are stupid”, “Apple Corp is God”; it’s the same bullshit raised to the top that only this core elitist group drag up there. I hope ignores these assholes and makes it a site for everybody, not just crazy Apple/reefer-loving fundamentalist athiests.

  4. Gramzon says:

    Here here!
    I just about gave up on Digg for news simply because of this group of so called “Digg elites” who publish the same crap and always get it on the front page.

    Digg was made so even the little guy could share his two-cents with the world, I applaud Rose and the Digg staff for keeping this idea alive.

  5. hubbers says:

    Well said that is exacty what is going on. Let’s hope that the results improve. Although I can’t say for certain whether these so called super users are responsible for the decline I certainly think they used to be better.

  6. R says:

    Digg might not have been made by the Diggers, but the success of Digg is built on the actions of users, especially those who pour a lot of time in it. Digg is unlike other sites where the meat is provided by the company, the meat is made by the users. It also makes no sense whatsoever to give inexperienced users an advantage. That’s like the Olympics automatically adding a few seconds onto whoever the champion 100 meter sprinter is.

  7. hubbers says:

    Inexpereienced users? Surely everyone has the same abilty to judge how diggable a submission is. Or maybe the old elite think that some diggers are more equal than others.

  8. HMTKSteve says:

    Top Diggers earn that position by the voting of the community. If these folks were not submiting good stuff they would not be where they are today.

    Digg should show bury data as well as digg data for each story. At this point in time if a story gets 5 buries and 30 diggs it will be buried. So much for Democracy in action.

  9. SV says:

    Haha @ R. What an ignorant view to have. Where I am looking from, your analogy worked against you. I agree that some people may have contributed to the success of but don’t be thinking they haven’t received anything for it – no person does anything without expecting something in return (even Mother Theresa was motivated by some inner thoughts of her own). How is giving a few seconds to the sprinter relevant? They already won? Um? I hope no-one diggs that analogy! Anyway, an “advantage”, I would assume of what you’re referring to, would be like a handicap in golf – it encourages the inexperienced to try a little harder to compete with the experienced and keeps the game healthy (both for players and supporters). So how exactly is that a bad thing? Oh, that’s it.. it stops the top golf players from winning all the prize money and getting all the attention with little effort.. Oh yes, Mr R, now I understand why we need to ensure that only a select few can continue manipulating to their advantage.

  10. L says:

    You’re obviously one of the elitist types. I agree w/ hubbers, your veiwpoint suggests a few diggers or more important than most. That’s bullshit, digg isn’t supposed to be Xbox LIVE, there aren’t “n00bs” on digg, it’s supposed to be for everyone. And those elitists that “pour a lot of time in to it”. as you say, are crazy! They pour TOO MUCH time into it; time that normal average every day humans can’t spend because they actually have lives, work, shcool, family, relationships, and don’t have time to sit on their Apple computer all day long smoking pot and digging items.

  11. I hate all those pricks that bury posts on digg because it wasn’t submitted by their faggot ass circle. Fuck them! I never curse, but this is justified, those people truly suck.

  12. msisson says:

    Personally, I’d particularly like to see Digg enforce their TOS to exclude the staffs of other websites using Digg soley to generate traffic to their own sites, advance their own agendas, and fatten their own pocket books.

    Take Matt Corley (Digg ID: mcorleyTP) for example. Matt Corley is “Research Associate” for Corley only submits stories from, diggs the stories of fellow staff members, and gets paid to do so. This seems like a clear Digg TOS violation to me. He’s dugg 571 stories since April 2007 and has not left a single comment. He enjoys a 47% popular ratio for driving traffic to his own site (which simply repackages content from other sources) and contributes NOTHING that builds a sense of community on Digg. Matt Corley and users like him are increasing turning our Digg community into a sewer for their own gain.

    Matt Corley’s Bio:

  13. Dave says:

    Ooooh nobody else knows how to copy/paste a URL — Digg is doomed….DOOMED!

  14. R says:

    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.)

  15. Penrose W. Rimjob Esq. says:

    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.

  16. midori01 says:

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

  17. Bjorn says:

    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

  18. SV says:

    @ 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”)

  19. nfxfsx says:

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

  20. herbi4 says:

    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.

  21. joffff says:

    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.

  22. Dave says:

    The whole premise of 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 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.

  23. thinkdeep says:

    I don’t know what the “new” rules are or what the “old” rules were. implied a democratization of news stories. A vote, if you will. In television, that has brought us Brittney and Paris on the nightly “News”. 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?

Leave a Reply to hubbers Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: