digg

Join DiggAbout

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

Digg - New Design

diggtheblog.com — Title says it all.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • digger_twit, on 10/10/2007, -85/+15http://bayimg.com/aagMNaaBg
    • titlesaysitall, on 10/16/2007, -17/+289THE TITLE LACKS A THOUSAND WORDS.
      • Shorties, on 10/10/2007, -24/+7I see what you did there
        • mdhauke, on 10/10/2007, -2/+25Where is the redesignation of the comment system?
          • shunpike, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I'd be more worried about the friends dugg feature when u hover the mouse over, they are now just using tiny little icons so if only 1 or 2 friends dugg it it looks really shabby :(
          • shunpike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14sorry double post accidentily digg this one down

            actually there should b a remove comment feature shouldn't there?
          • sacherjj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22The biggest problem wasn't addressed, the comment system. Open two tabs of comments locks up my fast Core 2 Duo machine for 5-10 seconds. I guess that I why I'm spending less and less time on Dig..
          • LastHand, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1DIGG! THIS!
            http://digg.com/design/Firefox_users_of_Digg_Suffer_Horrible_BUG_Syndrome_PIC
          • superal1394, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3or you could realize that ad revenue is how digg stays online, and hence they will make it so you know where the ads would be anyway just to annoy the ***** out of you...

            I personally didn't care, but I noticed that that was there.
        • Razster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6They screwed it up...
          When I Digg something I expected to see +Fav next to the title, but now it is moved once again to the bottom... WTF learn to program and design Digg.com!

          If my boss had the notion that the site looked like ***** from 100,000 people... I would change it in 20min, from time of opening the PHP, to Saving and uploading. I've never seen a webdesigner/webmaster take months to change something, let alone waste months not doing ***** when all they needed to do was go back to the older style... What I'm getting at here is that Digg would suck at being anything but Digg.com
      • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -12/+55The comment system still sucks balls. Way to prioritize.
        • ChefAnubis, on 10/10/2007, -17/+1actually check again in the customize tab, the comment system is awesome now, each can get their preferences accordingly
          • Rovient, on 10/13/2007, -6/+29Do we really need a Digg article to tell us that Digg has a new look? This community is so moronic sometimes.
          • TheSceal, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Plenty of us are using the RSS feed and wouldn't have noticed otherwise.
          • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Actually, one improvement I REALLY like among everything else, is if you bury something, it collapses and completely disappears. That is ONE SWEET FEATURE. That means you don't have to look at the same idiotic digg article, if you don't want to see any Apple or Bush impeach stuff, just MAKE IT DISAPPEAR. Awesome!
        • DocHoliday22, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17Yeah comments still suck ass and my Firefox browser can't handle the stress...
          • FizixMan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+37There's too many javascript's Captain! She canna handle it, she just dun have the powah!

            Seriously, every time I load a story's comments, the browser freezes for a few seconds while initializing everything. More than once the timeout limit was reached and Firefox prompted me to kill execution of the scripts. WTF is that? Something tells me that is unacceptable.

            Almost as bad as IE7 freezing and unresponsive during DNS lookups... :D
          • FizixMan, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3Actually, looks like it was the DuggMirror Firefox extension. Feel free to digg me down.
      • eschompthis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3WTF happened to the videos descriptions?
    • nreynolds, on 10/10/2007, -12/+156Fix the ***** square ad on the front page that pushes the Top Stories section down, it ***** ruins the whole page. And I'm not gunna use adblock, the page shouldn't suck that bad. I know websites need ads but that one ruins the look of the page and makes it seem really unprofessional.

      EDIT: it's not just the front page, every page that has a Top Stories section like in Upcoming and everything.
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -7/+41It seriously looks like a giant mole on the face of digg.
        • themastersb, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21I don't know why moles on people's faces are called "beauty marks". They should be called ugly ass mark.
          • BlackOp, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10As a mole sufferer, I agree entirely.
          • inukki, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3From what I've experienced so far, I think It came from the 80's but that as far as I can remember, but don't really care about older people who care about it though... kinda like those who have some form of obsessive compulsive need to keep hearing the eighties songs shamelessly in the year 2007.
          • sabach, on 10/13/2007, -1/+9@inukki What the ***** are you talking about?
          • HolyChimp, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3"Moley, Moley, Moley!"
      • kenok, on 10/10/2007, -10/+7It's a good thing i'm using adblock.
        • JoshuaH, on 10/13/2007, -1/+29Adblock still leaves a blank spot, And the top stories are still pushed down.
          • GhostCow, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Opera doesn't leave a blank spot, gogo opera!
          • jjb123, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Not if you go "Right Click -> Ad block Frame." Then there is no gap.
      • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1With the traffic that comes through here, think about how much they can charge for that space. Removing it or not would probably be a tough a decision for them. For myself, I think I will finally look into Adblock (bye snorg girls!).
      • quomen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7The area right next to the Digg logo looks way too bare.. somewhat of an awkward blank space.
      • MrSpontaneous, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I second the complaint about the ad block above the top 10 stories, as well as the blank space next to the digg logo. Perhaps you should move the search bar there and position the logout at the top right like every other website out there.

        Until the square ad is removed, I'm R.I.P.-ing it: http://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/521/
      • drewskiMD, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6So is this *****-tastic design the result of the new ad deal with Microsoft? Remember Kevin's post:

        "So, no dancing monkey ads, and the design will remain uncluttered."

        Sorry Kevin, but you f'd this one.
      • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0So while I was fixing the comment, I got timed out, no ticker like the old comment system, imagine the irony. So a pretty website is good and all, good job; but shouldn't functionality take priority over prettiness? If users are number 1, why are your priorities out of whack?

      • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Okay, I wasn't too unhappy half an hour ago, as digg is a great resource to me, and I can understand trying to monetize a good website as much as is tolerable (I'm sure there's an amount of overhead running this site few users really think about). But, is it just me, or has the upcoming stories section had its top stories bar shortened by the massive, obtrusive ads on top and bottom? That's not an aesthetic injury; that's a functional injury. Please try to fix this if I'm not imagining it.
    • defectDS, on 10/10/2007, -2/+32The new design is so inconsistent. The RSS button disappears, leaving an unsightly empty space next to popular/upcoming, the url before the description should go back to where it was, the new icons are huge next to their text counterparts, the links in the header move from left to right when you log in.... ughdjfshkdafwd.
      • rpgmaker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And the menus are inconsistents. If you have an animated banner there it will block your menus view.

        The digg staff doesn't know what to do with the interface anymore.
    • JC4P, on 10/16/2007, -8/+62This new design makes my firefox freeze for about 20-30 seconds each time I go to the homepage.
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21So it's not just me! What the hell is going on? I have a fast computer and never have had a freezing problem previously with digg, firefox becomes completely unresponsive at random times now on digg.
        • defectDS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7I blame the ajax. The pages and pages of AJAX!!SLFKWDLFWA
      • jdhore1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Same for me, but it is better about freezing than digg 3.0 (?) was
      • MatchStick, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3i can't even open "www.digg.com". when i try, the "We'll be back shortly" page with the swirly Dreamcast logo comes up.
        • Dested, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2How did you get here then?
          Hit Ctrl+F5 buddy.
        • MatchStick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1i just went straight to "http://www.digg.com/news"

          yeah, Ctrl+F5 worked, i dunno why i didn't think to hold Ctrl b4...thanx.
          • FizixMan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Forces the browser to load the page regardless of any chached data you have. I believe it also changes the information you send to the site, by default I think browsers tell sites (when refreshing) to retrieve cached data from the site if available. Ctrl (or Shift on some browsers) + F5 doesn't send that flag to the server.
        • joestump, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1*sigh* That's the Debian GNU/Linux logo ... n00b.
      • Sep11insidejob, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Same here.
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2OK, found the problem. It's the duggmirror firefox extension I (and presumably you guys) use. Disable it, and the freezing is gone.
        • FizixMan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Winrar!

          Crap, but I like that extension. But all it does is add [duggmirror] links. ;_;
    • craftyguy, on 10/10/2007, -13/+120And the comment system still sucks.
      • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -12/+2Th new comments my have their visual flaws, but it really has cut down on about 80% of the comment abuse (your comment is part of the other 20%) which I value more highly in the end.
        • joestump, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6Two facts about the new comment system; overall comments are up 20% and blocking, violations and spam are down. The new comments, despite the vocal opposition, have been an overwhelming success from the numbers perspective. Visual and speed enhancements are forthcoming.
          • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10My only remaining complaint with the comment system is that 99% of the time if I post a 1st level comment after the first 50, I never see it again. Usually when clicking on the "see next 50 discussions" link, I get about 5-7 additional at most, and it's never mine, if I've posted one. Using resources like Neaveru's, I've learned that apparently at least some other people see them, but never me. Is this some Firefox bug whose fix I've missed? Does anyone else run into this problem?
          • jer2eydevil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Joe I respect that you are an employee of the site who has put much hard work into making the site great. As an employee you may see things more from the management or developer perspective than as a user. I am a LONG time user of Digg (yeah my username isn't as old as it could be) so I want to chime in and on your comment, maybe its because you have some super duper connection to the interweb in CA or maybe its because you work in Digg's offices but here on the east coast, these comment boxes are slow loading, buggy (they lose posts when we click submit) and way slower at submitting than the old system was.

            I'm done bitching, its not like it makes any difference. You need to do what you have to in order to survive and obviously this system cut back on bandwidth a whole lot.
          • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If you want to help eliminate worthless posts, fix the 'sort by most diggs' mode to keep threads intact (sorting each thread level by 'most diggs') and only sort the posts in each level. This will make worthless parent posts fall to the bottom of the page. Then, separate out the different viewing thresholds (all, -10, -4, 0, 5, 10) from the sorting mode (date, rating), so we can sort by rating and set various viewing thresholds. Then make the default display mode 'sort by most diggs' and 'display 0 or above', and you will improve the signal to noise ratio another 10%.
          • Glugory, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1@KMye
            Yeah dude, I have that problem ALL THE TIME. Then, if you change your preferences to just show ALL comments it takes FOREVER to load a damn page. The comment system sucks. I don't give a flying ***** if more people are using it. If it doesn't function the way it should then it JUST SUCKS. Not its, ands, or buts, IT SUCKS.
          • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1@Glugory
            I've had my prefs set to "show all" since a few hours after the new comments were in place, which works for me since I always used to end up expanding every dugg-down comment out of curiosity anyway. I still lose comments left and right (after the initial page load); my understanding is the "show all" only relates to comment diggs, and not how many to load up when you open a page. Is there some option I've missed to just load everything available at once??
          • strictlybogart, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1what's wrong with having a picture category?
          • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ok... then why on bigger threads do certain comments somehow detach themselves from the original thread they were replying too? Just look at a big thread... all of the last comments are usually detached comments from the first 50 or so.

            Its not just the speed issue you need to worry about. Its actual functionality of this bug ridden piece of ***** comment system.

            That above example is just one of the crappy, "features" of your comment system.
        • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3It still doesn't display comments behind a buried comment, even if I have it set to 'display all'. This totally sucks when I check for replies to my post behind a buried comment (forcing me to log out to do this). Comments are still disappearing when I log in, but can be seen if I log out. Sorting by rating still breaks all the threads, making that sorting mode worthless. Yeah, it's still totally broken...
      • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7They don't have their priorities straight, if digg listened to the community, functionality over plastic surgery would have taken priority. I respect the hours of time they've spent and all, but with all due respect, they need to get their ***** priorities straight.
    • Konrad9, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16I liked a one-click switch to other news types :
    • dtang, on 10/16/2007, -34/+2diggtheblog.com domain name and its counterparts (.net .org) are available. email me at danieldynasty @ gmail.com
      diggcast and diggnation domain names are also available.
      • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18dtangisaputang.com (org, net, etc) is available at your favorite domain registry site as well.
      • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8...and on a more serious note, if you're serious about owning those domains, I'm pretty sure you have some serious legal precedent working against you if digg decides they want those...
      • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2(seriously)
    • toast1226, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5The added colors suck, no offense. The darker green and ***** orange don't work well with the rest of the layout.
    • skealoha86, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14Hey, let's add more negative space and make it more bubbly and make everything BIGGER! After all, half of our demographic is blind from masturbating to Metacafe videos.
    • mraustin1337, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Grease Monkey Script That Moves It Down:
      http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/11766

      Threw that together real quick for all you diggers.
    • jstohler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I'd like to thank Digg for putting a Submit button on every page. I was getting tired of playing "Find the Submit."
    • rhabd0mancer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3This new design frightens and confuses me!
    • Elranzer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2No PICS section. Comment system not set to the podcast's system. No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.
    • rpgmaker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I still have the same f*cking comment system. That was the only redesign I was hoping for.
  • ThreeDee912, on 10/10/2007, -14/+18Digg was down for about an hour, now it's back up, and I don't see any change yet...?
  • digger_twit, on 10/10/2007, -7/+49They rolled it back - probably still buggy.
    • Octanum, on 10/10/2007, -4/+33o.O I still see the newest design.
      • juicys, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Um... learn to read the post times.
      • samsam123, on 10/10/2007, -8/+10i cant wait for the day when someone is actually able to read this comment
      • YodaGuy5, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ummmm I see your comment...
    • ApplCmptrDood, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yeah, it is buggy - http://bayimg.com/iaGNJAabG
    • rejoined, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Ok I was just experimenting, and I clicked 'Remove' on the Navigation/Tag Bar/line:
      Popular Topics WOrld & Business Technology....Remove

      And it's ofcourse now gone, and I can't seem to get it back. Any help Mr. Burka? I'd appreciate it. :)
      I guess I can remove the 'Digg' cookie, but I'm not sure that'd help..and I'd rather do it without deleting the cookie.
      Also Mr. Burka, you said and I quote: "To give the page a cleaner look and make it more functional, we’ve also tweaked the page and story summary layouts, streamlined the navigation, and provided more customization options."
      What exactly do you mean by 'more customization options'? What exactly are they, and how can we access it? If by customization options, you mean, links to 'all', 'news', and 'video' by 'Top 10 in All Topics', I guess, then an explanation is not required. Thanks. :)
    • LordByr0n, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9They rolled it back? They forgot to take this comment system with them
    • crpietschmann, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I see the new Digg design and it's still buggy!
  • MrBabyMan, on 10/10/2007, -6/+24Read Kevin's updated blog post
    http://digg.com/tech_news/Digg_to_combine_News_Videos_on_One_Page
    • rejoined, on 10/10/2007, -16/+4MrBabyMan, you are a submitter of repute on Digg, with almost more than 60% of your story and pic submits hitting the front page, and I quite actively Digg your story submits..not only because that I frequently come across your submits on the Digg front page, but also because your submits are interesting and quite worth a peek, and really worth Digging up.

      Of all the submitters on Digg, your stories don't need the extra prod...based on a Digg link to your Digg submit. I would of appreciated, if you'd have first given us the link to Kevin's blog first and then the link to your submit. Making people first click on your submit to reach the story, is mildly irritating. Many Diggers sometimes point a link to their recent submit in the comments of a story, where the link is relevant based on the content of the story and/or the discussion therein. And, it's perfectly ok..and I have sometimes dugg up stories, based on links provided in comments. But it makes it easier to Digg the submit, where the link to the content is also provided, especially in comments. Though ofcourse I believe, many Diggers would probably not agree with this particular view of mine, and quite predicably they will digg down this comment and they're perfectly entitled to do it.
      I just personally believe, it's nice and ethical to link to the original content of one's Digg submit, especially in the comments..before pushing the link of their Digg submit. Ok, 'ethical' is probably not the write word for it, or even it may be too strong to use in this context, or even weird...but I just think that'd be the right way of doing it. Thanks.
      • rejoined, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2...*right word for it...
        Dang, I can't believe I made that awful typo. :(
    • mseneschal, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4@rejoined, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

      ~Billy Madison quote
      • chilekillr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Learn to reply.
      • sweetdeals, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I not quite sure if I can agree with the original comment, but I can agree with this one. That was stupid.
  • alberto24, on 10/10/2007, -32/+3Another screenshot here:
    http://www.centernetworks.com/first-new-digg-screenshot
  • Bricks, on 10/10/2007, -16/+111Website upgrade of the best kind - functional, minimalist, and gradual. Nonetheless, got my fingers crossed for Digg Images in the final version.
    • omaryak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Agreed, but FTA: "This update is also an especially important structural change for future content like images, which will also have its own dedicated section."
    • EndersGame, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5Ah so this is what Web 3.0 looks like :D
      • dionhewson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I hope not...this new digg is hard work...so change the view by 24hr, 7 day, 365 days etc...I have to move my mouse from left of screen down and to the right and then back to the left to read and digg entries...it is extra work...plus there is white space on the rounded corners...did they even test this before launch???
    • DenRoedeBaron, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3It is definately visually appealing, though the site is still bloated with javascript and the drop down navigation shouldn't require a click to show its items.
      • drakelord, on 10/10/2007, -1/+23Actually, I prefer clicking. I don't want a bunch of menu's popping down if I accidentally scroll my mouse over them.
      • unitedstatians, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It's just opens with a single click, how lazy can you be?
    • jspegele, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You might just get your wish, jayadelson dugg your comment.
    • Cerberus047, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4Lol Im at school and i saw all the changes i jumped out of my seat and yelled ***** ya! everyone stared and now thanks digg i have detention for a week.
      • fxspec06, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I call BS.
      • rnwen2750, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Pay attention in school. Browsing digg is not much of a money maker as a career choice.
        • Darkhacker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Is that why people have to mark things either as SFW or NSFW? Sometimes I think people get paid to browse Digg the way everyone is always commenting how they are at work.
    • DarkDx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Hell, we needed the images section so we could separate all these lame dugg-up-by-n00bs old and repeated pic submissions. So, if they're going to add the section PLEASE don't combine them with text submissions in the front page, it would piss up many diggers.
    • hinkypunx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think there is too much going on, a little too much for the eyes. May cause headaches or vomiting.
    • jarcoal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The digg staff is extremely lacking in good designers. I mean look at news/videos/podcasts menus. That sort of design has never been good, ever.

      Also, although it may seem cool to change the layout of your main page a few times per year, it's just driving us crazy digg...
    • MatttK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't get how this is a good design. Now I have to click twice to get anywhere. I don't "view all" because I like to view what I want, such as gaming news, tech news, world news, or science news. I like going between the sections because it allows me to control exactly how much I have to catch up on. I can know that I've read all of today's gaming stories and save the tech stories for later in the day to catch up on, etc. Obviously I can still do that now but it's annoying. Why isn't Steamy out yet? :'(
  • NobleArc, on 10/10/2007, -18/+2For the record, you posted this first, and someone posted it slightly after I did, but I have the best screenshot yet in my story:
    http://digg.com/design/New_Digg_Layout_leaked

    (Not saying you have to digg it, or anything, but that's where the image is. 1680x1050. High res.)
    • 7of7, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2You need to get yourself some Adblocky goodness. That is, unless you turned it off just to show the full effect of the new style.
    • TimRogers, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Does the resolution of a screenshot of a website actually matter?
  • adroit, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1The Digg crew is such a tease! i want something new!
    bummer on rolling back the update.
  • Nobiting, on 10/16/2007, -19/+1I managed to save some of the source code and captured some nice screens http://digg.com/offbeat_news/DIGG_V4_0_LEAKED
  • treelovinhippie, on 10/10/2007, -11/+184With all the programmers you guys have got over there now, surely you can spit out a pictures section a lot earlier than October.
    • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2There are literally dozens of sites to get FW: FW: FW: FW: FW: Check out these FUNNY picture sites my grandma sent me. Just go there. KEvin and Co. desperately do not want Digg to become like one of those sites becuase those sites have no hope of ever being sold for more than $1000.
      • cjh24, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6do you think that digg was made to be sold?
        • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Yeah. it was. You are delusional if you think otherwise. KEvin Rose will not lket you suck his *****, no matter how much you kiss up to him.
      • stevecole, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Have you not yet realized how digg works?
        People are going to submit what they want to submit, and the most favored are are going to get dugg to the front page. If you censor it, it's not digg.
        • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0YOU obvious have no idea how Digg works. It has not been a democratic process for several months. It is who has the most multiple accounts, or is part of the biggest circle jerk to get stories dugg.
  • andrewcsayer, on 10/16/2007, -39/+519fix the damn comment system!
    • t3714, on 10/10/2007, -3/+33Well, according to the blog: "I also wanted to let you know that we hear you on the comments system, and we’re working on making changes that speed up the system and make it easier and more lightweight (think podcasting comments)."
      • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -4/+26Yes but they're still prioritizing plastic surgery over functionality by not fixing the comment system. It would be nice if they were frank with us. It feels to me like Gonzo is heading the damn developer team over there
        • Darkhacker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Digg Community: Were you aware that we, the Digg community, have been complaining for months about this new comment system?
          Kevin Rose: I do not recall.
      • monsterenergy, on 10/10/2007, -9/+43Just put back the old system. DONT BE ASHAMED TO TAKE A STEP BACK.
        • DrawingTheSun, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I think going to the podcast system would be really neat,
        • Cerebral, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yea considering the podcast system is what everyone really wanted in the first place. With this they definitely abandoned the KISS model.
        • Angostura, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Err, no thanks. I prefer the new system. Particularly with the option set to show all comments by default.
      • svivian, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3In that case, why is the main comment system not like podcasts already. If the code is structured properly, it should take less than 10 minutes to change the commenting system to an already existing system elsewhere on the site.
    • joestump, on 10/10/2007, -2/+52We're meeting this week to go over changes.
      • Glugory, on 10/10/2007, -48/+7Is one of the priorities in this meeting to actually implement changes that the user base has been BEGGING AND PLEADING for for months now, or are you guys just gonna have a good ol' pat on the back session over your useless, not to mention *****, new site design? I mean, PLEASE, all that negative space WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY would you think all that is a good idea? Maybe drinking shouldn't be allowed in the Digg offices anymore if this is the kind of CRAP we can expect to see. But buck up buddy, you know that no matter what you can use the, "It's a free service, so don't use it if you don't like it!" defense against anything I say. Of course that doesn't do ANYTHING to negate what I've said, but you can MAYBE sleep at night despite the fact that your work has disgusted any user with half a brain. *inhale and exhale* Damn that felt good.
      • jer2eydevil88, on 10/10/2007, -4/+24Glugory, just wow. Could you be any bit more rude and disrespectful? If you don't like the site tell the digg team why you don't like it, it is never cool to just go off on another person with insults in "CAPS" when they didn't do anything at all to you.

        I dislike this comment system yet I try to offer constructive feedback instead of "this is the kind of CRAP we can expect to see". The only "CRAP" I have seen is your post.
        • Glugory, on 10/10/2007, -26/+4First off, yes, I could be more rude and disrespectful. And in terms of writing them well thought out articles about why their site is going down the crapper, many have done that and it has continually fallen on deaf ears. All we hear is, "It's coming... in a few months." If they're going to sit around with their thumbs up their asses and implement ***** design changes (and this design change IS *****) while the actual changes that the user base has been clamoring for sits in a stack labeled "We'll get around to it," then they need to be insulted. Maybe that will finally make them get their heads out of their asses and fix something that matters. Oh, and I only ever used caps for emphasis.
      • KUKBAHLAM, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Glugory: A self contained argument for an age filter on digg.
      • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Heres another one for you. Session timeouts. While reading this thread... I dig people up or down. I like how if I dont read the thread, "fast enough" for your timer, that when I attempt to do something, it tells me my session has timed out.

        If you need a beta tester or something, to discover all of these glaringly obvious bugs within your own system. I would be happy to help you out.
    • unco, on 10/10/2007, -22/+12and no need to be rude about this FREE service
      • Dested, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10Hey were the ones who have to use it.
      • nubtard, on 10/10/2007, -3/+18Why is it when a free service is ***** users or developers use the excuse that it's free? On that note - digg.com ads probably generate tons of cash. Don't be fooled by "free".
        • Protoss, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Free in that we don't have to pay to use it....
    • webRat, on 10/10/2007, -15/+2I'm still trying to figure out what the hell everyone is bitching about with the comments? They work for me. o_O
      • Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7then you must not be using Firefox and if you are, you must only be looking at stories with 5 comments.
        • Weip, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0I have FF and I don't have any problem. Maybe your pc sucks.
          • Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"Maybe your pc sucks."

            Ok even if it did have a problem, would you know? Get off the computer and pay attention in class.
    • bills534, on 10/10/2007, -12/+17What exactly is wrong with this comment system? seriously, I don't get it and I'm not trying to be a smartass.
      • DiggsOnlyNeoCon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Sometimes you have to click WAYYYY too much to see stuff. For example, there's a game in the web games section that has 500+ comments with invites. You have to get all the way to the bottom to see new invites, which involves clicking to see "51-100," then "101-150," then "151-200." ...
      • gmason08, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7The #1 reason why the new comment system sucks is it "fixed" something that wasn't "broken" with this thing that is clearly broken/far worse than what it ostensibly improved. #2 reason-see #1.

        The solution for the design meeting or whatever is simple and will keep the meeting short-first and only matter for consideration-"RE-IMPLEMENT THE OLD COMMENT SYSTEM"-everyone says AYE-Meeting Adjourned. Perhaps handing out free cookies and coloring books after the meeting would be helpful and a nice touch. And to the guy above who said K.I.S.S., I nominate you as the new head of the design team.
      • KUKBAHLAM, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Comments on the primary tree tend to be from-the-hip and often the replies are more thought out. (present company excepted) These are the comments that are least likely to be read. Since most diggers have a sufficient internet connection and (hopefully) the patience to wait for the page to load, the only reason for the current comment section is to drastically reduce digg's bandwidth. My argument is that this 'dumbs down' digg and makes it appear that the idiots have taken over. That said, your comment is what is right with digg. Dugg up for being sincere and honest poster.
      • KUKBAHLAM, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The comments on the main tree tend to be 'from-the-hip' and the responses tend to be much more thought out (present company excepted.) Since the best comments are hidden by default, it makes it look as though digg has been taken over by idiots. As most of us have acceptable internet connections and a browser with multiple tabs, load times are not a real issue. The only reason for the current system is to drastically reduce bandwidth costs for digg. It also occasionally dumps your posts... this is my second try on this one. What is right about the comment system? Comments like yours... Honest sincere posters seeking discussion instead of argument.
      • KUKBAHLAM, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Sorry for the double post......or triple post if you count this... but it furthers my argument. I refreshed and pasted my second post.... this means that it took more than 13min for digg to register my post.
      • LordofShadows, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Crazy amounts of cpu usage is my problem with them.
      • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The new comment system locks up browsers, loses comments, causes double posts, detaches random thread replies and dumps them at the bottom of the thread, pegs my processor at 100% cpu utilization when loading large threads which causes my laptop fan to hit, "jet engine mode". And is just ***** annoying to boot.
    • 7righthandedmen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I liked the old comment system, because if say the server hosting the file is down, i have to look for TEXT for someone asking for a mirror and then view replies, to get the link i want, usually i just scan the page for a bit till i hit a link.
  • gamer31, on 10/10/2007, -20/+88still no picture section....:(
    • joestump, on 10/10/2007, -3/+26Kevin wrote a whole blog post about how a redesigned homepage and another forthcoming enhancement would be paving the way for an images section. This is step one. Expect step two and THEN images. Again, as Kevin said in his post (http://blog.digg.com/?p=93) we don't want to just throw up images. We want it to rock and, despite how awesome we are, rocking out takes time.
      • nreynolds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11rocking out should always be spontaneous. You should just throw up a link that says "Images" and have it link to something crazy, like someone's website where they have a bunch of cat pictures, THAT would be rocking out.
      • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Joe maybe you guys should be a bit more spontaneous as nreynlods is saying; it seems like too much structure can destroy the purity of things sometimes. Just make changes , seriously, and let DATA DRIVE DECISIONS.
      • Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I got to go with the previous posters on this joe. Ever heard of prototyping? (i'm sure u have). What good is all the structure and all the planning and prepping and the users (those who use it) can't stand it or want this feature or remove that feature. Put out a barebones image section and let the users decide where you want to go. While you are the Digg Overloards, implementing items exactly how YOU want them doesn't necessarily guarantee that people will stay. And as the others have stated, spontaneous is the best form of rocking out, it ensures you don't get stale. B/C I'll admit I don't stay on Digg as much as I used to, so spontaneous may be what I need to stay.

        As M$, Altavista, Excite, yahoo(for a while) can point out, at some point in time someone will come along and dethrone you. Make the users happy, while keeping you mostly happy, and we all win. Just my 0.02.
      • ryllharu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yay, soon we can all be enjoy the newest in the -chan family, Diggchan.
        /sarcasm

        Ugh, yet another imageboard site was not necessary.
    • bills534, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4boo-*****-hoo
    • jbryer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Try photagr.com for saving images
  • monkeycatDx, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2No, pic section. But when you say pic when u post one, it shrinks it down to about 10px by 10px!
  • NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -12/+5Looks nice so far... but jeezus, how hard is it... for them to add a stupid image section? It wouldn't take more than a few minutes of copy and pasting code... -_-
    • FetalSage, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18They're probably thinking of a way to show information from the pic, or how to display it rather than just link to it? Who knows. Just give them time, NikoKun.
      • killerofkiller, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3they have had a long time, If it ever comes out, it better be effing amazing...
  • Xizer, on 10/10/2007, -15/+4It sucks. It sucks ass through a straw.
  • chaoticprout, on 10/10/2007, -12/+23I like it =X
    • stevecole, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3And you're an Apple fanboy who uses emoticons.
  • redrock34, on 10/16/2007, -6/+188I for one would love to see more ad space intruding on the news stories please.
    • Mr_Lyle, on 10/10/2007, -13/+34Digg has ads?
      • PiMPSP, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8Ya, really though..they still put those ad thingamajigs on sites?...funny they disappeared right after firefox came out...I just thoought it was a coincidence
        /sarcasm
    • Isaaxmz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8No wonder there is so much white space. I thought they jiffed the new design too.
      • SiRwhilms, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Check my submitted stories. I wrote a Greasemonkey script to eliminate the whitespace.
    • MatttK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1[Insert comment about how awesome commenter is for using Firefox and adblock]

      Do people REALLY tell everyone they have adblock EVERY TIME someone complains about ads? Not everybody uses Firefox or can install anything on the computer they're currently using.
  • alokrsx, on 10/10/2007, -19/+40To me, it looks much better than the old design...
    • NSMike, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4It looks better but sure as hell doesn't work better. Why do they keep increasing the number of clicks it takes to switch between the different front pages!?
  • Respec7, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3is there any change to the comments
  • LordStryker, on 10/16/2007, -16/+435Needed Badly:
    1.) New Comment System
    2.) Image Section
    3.) A device that allows us to slap people who submit inaccurate stories/dumb comments right through their monitor screens.
    • aaronm67, on 10/10/2007, -5/+344) Have the site cause your browser to not randomly crash when viewing the front page or comments
      5) Not have every single page take 30+ seconds to load
      You wouldn't think this would be that hard, considering the only content on the site is text, the images/javascript/other ***** are just to make it look pretty.
      • Jugalator, on 10/10/2007, -13/+7"4) Have the site cause your browser to not randomly crash when viewing the front page or comments"

        ???

        6) Have arronm67 repair/switch OS and/or switch browser.
    • Jugalator, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5"A device that allows us to slap people who submit inaccurate stories/dumb comments right through their monitor screens."

      Well, at least you no longer have to give a reason for burying a story. It's one step on the way. ;)
    • knowyourrights, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2No see, you're putting functionality ahead of plastic surgery, that's not how the digg team prioritizes things, what are you thinking?? Digg needed a set of huge plastic ***** and it got one. Yet now it can't run a mile in less than 10 minutes...
    • kxhoopshooter, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11what about fixing the search? no one ever thinks about search!
    • michaelbolton, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11heres a link to my prototype (gif) http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b229/jasonium/3759418_l.gif
      • DarkDx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0HAha, for those mothefukas pic-submitters
      • jdstorer2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2michaelbolton: You, sir, win this day's best comment award.
        DarkDx: You, however, win a trip to my block button.
  • StaticRedux, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3It just went live
  • Sithseth, on 10/10/2007, -14/+12pooo, ads for walmart!
    • sidyadav, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2Even worse: I see Zune
    • zongamin, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3and the reason you aren't blocking ads is....?
      • cjh24, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Because: if everyone blocks ads, companies stop advertising. If companies stop advertising, how will digg make money? selling polycotton tee-shirts to every user?
        The web is what it is because companies like to throw money into advertising.

        PS: who has actually ever felt compelled to by something that was pitched to them on the net eg.like viagra?
        • wholly2b, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1re your PS: the cost of sending out millions of spam messages is so low (especially using a botnet) that even if literally one person in a million responds they turn a profit.
      • PRlME, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1 cjh24 dident i see you downloading on limewire a few months back
  • Hazardc, on 10/10/2007, -21/+10SERIOUSLY? ***** METACAFE? That site smells like a pile of hot garbage. WTF digg?
  • darkane, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2So, yeah. They really need to make the z-index for the menu drop downs higher so they are over the ad, not under.
  • Octanum, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Bah, it's too bad I can't get rid of the space between the Digg logo and "My Profile" by just moving the content from the 2nd bar into the void.
  • Eleo, on 10/10/2007, -6/+74"Title says it all."

    Nope, title says "Digg - New Design".
    • Octanum, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9I see what you did there.
      • timusca, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11From this moment on, I pledge to digg this comment down every time I see it. I'm sick and tired of it and everyone who thinks they're being funny by posting it after seeing a hundred others do it are way too late. Its lame.
  • xbertox, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1my eyes were burning...
  • wjackson, on 10/10/2007, -15/+7Re: New Design-

    DO NOT WANT.
    • Malte33, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3The new Design looks not bad. But the old was better...
      • Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's been the trend so far...ever progression of the site further makes us want the previously unliked version. By the time they get images up and running, we're gonna be going ape ***** to get the previous version to this back.
  • manjy90, on 10/10/2007, -23/+72I for one welcome our new....***** it, this new Digg sucks! The comments are still horrible.
    • BransonLAN, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3It takes time to fix stuff for a site this big without screwing something else up. I see more bitching about the comment system than anything useful. STFU or go somewhere else.
    • DivineLackey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Yeah try www.globalsoapbox.com ;)
    • Slog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I still fail to see the problem with the comment system. I'm just glad I don't have to scroll through 60+ replies to the first comment that had nothing to do with the original poster.
  • donkeySays, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6Hi5!!
    Not looking the best at the moment but I can feel it's headed at the right direction. Needs to smoothed out at some places. Good going, guys.
  • Shorties, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5While I would prefer if they would move away from the blue green theme and go back towards blue yellow theme I do like the new design.
  • shaun1018, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2No picture section still?

    CURSE YOU KEVIN ROSE!
  • goldenman, on 10/10/2007, -7/+12I love it! Way to go Digg!
  • JlmAWP, on 10/10/2007, -15/+102They tried to hide the "Upcoming Stories" tab, but I ***** found it!

    PUT IT BACK.

    • IHaveIssues, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Seriously. How do they want us to help promote new stories?
      • Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5They don't. Now the truth is being made known. They want us to think we dictate what is displayed, they want us to believe they aren't mainstream media (who is bought by the elite). They want us to.....***** I couldn't come up with anything else.
      • SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Doesnt matter if you promote new stories or not. Ive seen stories with 700+ diggs in the upcoming stories section that dont make it to front page. The Digg stories are chosen by a moderator.
  • Crazysah, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Yes. A better design but I stress... no image section?
  • Duncan3, on 10/10/2007, -8/+48Ack, web-2.0'd icons and bubbly design.... my eyes... it burns!!!!!!!!!
  • asancho, on 10/10/2007, -7/+44My eyes! The goggles do nothing!
  • virologydustin, on 10/10/2007, -15/+45Wow, this sucks.

    First, the comment system, now this.
  • HolyCrapYo, on 10/10/2007, -6/+7Well it's not Too bad..
  • ravi7791, on 10/10/2007, -3/+30I don't like the deticated bar for the topic selection. That should've been kept in the blue bar. It just makes the whole thing look unfinished. Also, the text on the blue bar shouldn't have been so big.
    • ravi7791, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18Here's an image to show what I would change:
      http://sixpop.com/images/file/75532422.png

      • HHP2K, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6See, that's an improvement. I like it, it would be way better like that. Thank you for sharing that!
      • nhassan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4that looks awesome =D
    • patik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I hate how the domain name is so prominent (and shows all the subdomains for places like static1.farm23.flikr.com) and the story blurb starts an inconsistent distance to the right of the button. Makes it hard to scan through the page.
    • proghead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1that's what greasemonkey's for...
  • Aindrea, on 10/10/2007, -22/+35I like it. Stop whining, people. It's not like you're paying for this. Cheer up a bit. :) It just shows that they listen, and you still complain.
    • deadlift, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9We are paying for it with our time, making them money. They are biting the hands that feeds, because without the users Digg is nothing! Nothing I tell you. Digg authors do not make the comments or stories or the buries... WE DO. We deserve what we want because WE are making them money. We are the traffic. We are the Diggers.
      • Vician, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Yes, but since the vocal minority such as yourself can leave and Digg would still make money... So, they really don't need you. So, while it's true that without users Digg is nothing, it's far past the point where unless they really really ***** up the basic workings that's not gonna happen. So be happy and quit yer bitchin'.
    • HHP2K, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6We have a right to complain, we drive this site. If we don't complain about what we don't like then nothing gets actually improved. We can't just sit back and let them show us improvements and say "well, that's okay, I can live with that.." no. let's make this OUR site. It's for US, so why don't we all have a say in what it looks like and how it operates?
      • Vician, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2And yet, I'm willing to bet that they don't care and really have no reason to care if you like it or not. It's just like the big fuss over the comments... Omg! The end of Digg! The users are everything! ***** you all for not listening to us! And yet, you're all still here, you're all still bitchin', and you'll continue on long after they don't change it back this time...
      • Aindrea, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0besides, all you do is complain. It's for you? what are YOU doing to make it better? Bitch and complain and whine? GREAT JOB, dude. Please.
    • Dcherub, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5yeah ***** that its free we can't complain ***** - we are the only reason these sites exist, they serve no function other than to satisfy us
    • Glugory, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4How does the fact that they just made the site WORSE show that they listen? Do you live in bizarro world?
      • Aindrea, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Go make your own site then. See if everyone agrees with whatever change you make to your site. You can't please everyone. Quit whining and shut it.
  • sauron256, on 10/10/2007, -3/+40New design... same old "title says it all" lame descriptions...
  • kitaljevich, on 10/10/2007, -5/+15And there go all my AdBlock settings...
  • gatewaydrug, on 10/10/2007, -15/+27Oh come on. You guys bitch way to much, its not bad.
    • defectDS, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11Because you have the new model of the GOGGLES!!! We still have the 1.0 versions and they STILL DO NOTHING!!!
    • Minkii, on 10/10/2007, -5/+16I agree, people on Digg bitch, wine, and complain way to much. The design looks great.
      • Pixelpaws, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Correction: People on the Internet bitch, whine, and complain. That problem is certainly not exclusive to Digg.
    • freff, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1No, it's not bad at all. I like it, but the comments system is still most definitely broken. This morning, I replied to a comment in another story, and upon refreshing, not only was my comment gone, but so was the parent comment, with everything under it.

      There must be a better way...
  • taxman, on 10/10/2007, -11/+7I liked the older comment section much better.....This design is such a pain to read all the comments.....
    • Crazysah, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yeah but by the other method it takes too long to load.
      • duniyadnd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's cause this method only loads 50 at a time any way.. they can do that with the old comment system if they wanted.
      • NSMike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The delay on loading is not because of the comments. It's because of the ads. Ever since I started using adblock, the page load is quite fast.
    • unitedstatians, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Oooops!.......I did it again.
  • jibegod, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3gross =[
  • bluepdx, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4The goggles! They do nothing! (More correctly, "My eyes! The goggles do nothing!")

    Seriously - those greens and blues are horrible. Big vote against from my part. I say roll it back and focus on fixing functionality. The visual design is perfectly fine.
    • thtswhatshesaid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2second...but it's not the colors that really bother me...I'm just not a huge fan of ui changes when something was working before...
  • donkeyshow, on 10/10/2007, -9/+27I dont like change...unless said change is digg/images, or revamped comments.
    • mrfreeziexp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4So glad someone said it. I hate it. It's slow, and I know it's not my computer/internet connection.. The comment section still sucks and when I try to bury stuff, it's really hard to click on that little arrow to specify what I am burring it for with out it disappearing.And It feels awkward to just bury something with out reason.. sigh, reddit is looking more and more enticing everyday..
      • BransonLAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Then go there if you're going to put it out there.
  • orbanj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2aaaand still no pictures section

    oh well i can uncross my fingers now
  • Discobiscuits, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1More functional, but I honestly prefer the previous layout a lot more. It was so unique and fluent... I literally stopped browsing to just look at it for a minute or two - billiant!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 321 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.