digg

Join DiggAbout

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

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

An Open Letter to Kevin Rose [Digg is Broken]

theseminal.com — Nearly 1,200 Diggs in less than 24 hours without making the front page. Is Digg censoring stories based on content or is the algorithm broken. Angry Digg users demand answers.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -33/+863SHOUTS MUST DIE THEY ARE KILLING DIGG!!!
    • Joshuarr, on 07/09/2008, -14/+161***** THINGS BROKEN!!!
    • borninda818, on 07/09/2008, -36/+7CANCER!!!!!1
    • yayintertubes, on 07/09/2008, -32/+23CAPSLOCK IS ***** AWESOME!!!!!11eleven
    • cdemi, on 07/09/2008, -12/+298I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT!!
    • seanieb, on 07/09/2008, -17/+8Block the users that shout...?
    • leerayIG88, on 07/09/2008, -11/+33could you just disable shouts?
      • TheLastFreeMan, on 07/09/2008, -0/+10Yeah but there's no way to delete them all without 2 button clicks each so I still have assloads of pages of old shouts.
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -3/+60ok guys disabling shouts only keeps your shout box clean. it doesn't fix the problem.
    • slightlyoffbeat, on 07/09/2008, -8/+44LOUD NOISES!
    • Roger, on 07/09/2008, -5/+10How else will digg claim to be social? Friends?
    • dolby, on 07/09/2008, -0/+18I used to post ton of stuff on digg some made it to the front page but now with all the upcoming and shouts (which I have used before) everytime I log on to digg it is like and assault on the senses so I only digg front page stories and then friend other diggers. But posting news or video I have stopped because there is to much politics involved now.
      • PoopStick, on 07/09/2008, -8/+3Digg is only for a very few select users to submit articles if they removed the shout and the up coming crap it would make it fair well fair to the few of us that have bots.

        This place becomes more lame by the second sort of like how TechTV died... i would assume it has a lot to do with the staff.

        Go Obama ***** the RIAA and the constitution is being raped. Steve Jobs like to stuff Apples up his ass and so on.
    • kenedamick, on 07/09/2008, -10/+8***** thing sucks (subdued no caps lock version without punctuation)
      • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4he the no caps and no punctuation is my thing - but its pretty stupid so I guess you can steal it
      • franklymister, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7parentheses and hyphens are punctuation marks
      • kenedamick, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Oh yeah. Damn. Ya got me. I didn't use hyphens though.
      • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -1/+8god damn grammar nazis
      • celkin, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3"unnecessary" quotation marks
      • kenedamick, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1I love 'em.
    • Kanele, on 07/09/2008, -1/+9submitting "Top 10 things digg is doing wrong" to hit the frontpage
    • FredFredrickson, on 07/09/2008, -3/+19I can understand being kind of baffled about the whole thing, but angry? Demanding answers? If Digg breaks for a few days, I'm not gonna have a *****' heart attack over it, sheesh.
    • MrBill10, on 07/09/2008, -1/+7like anything else on the net that gains power and influence, certain people and groups want to control it. knowledge is power and some people can't handle the free flow of information or think it needs to be controlled tighter. it could be kevin's political views or it could be something else entirely but whatever it is, one can usually find the motives by following the money trail.
      • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -2/+1Give me more 'XKCD' cartoons then.
    • Nicksname1, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Agreed!
    • sgtbutterscotch, on 07/09/2008, -1/+22While everyone is crying about this one particular story that didn't make it to the front page for a very long time because of a political bias somewhere in Digg, I'd wager that this is just a hiccup in the algorithm. I'd bet that Kevin or whoever tried tweaking the algorithm because of all of your bitching that only certain people can get stories popular and that shouting is ruining Digg. I don't know if the open letter only refers to the "Constitution dies tomorrow" article, but there was an article about the world's smallest flash drive that had like 1000 diggs, but stayed in the upcoming section. Are all you guys thinking what I am? That Digg is heavily bigoted against small flash drives? I'm sure this will all be sorted out, so can you guys just chill out? It's pissing me off how everyone gets their panties in a bunch when one bad thing happens on Digg. That one article probably isn't that special. I bet anyone could write an article about the Constitution dying in every year since this country was founded.
      • MadOgre, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3Political Bias, but it's just a glitch... sure.
    • sgregory416, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2well that's not gonna happen now is it?
    • l800LEMMINGS, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2don't add everyone as your friend, leave them as your fan and exercise discretion when adding
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -1/+6what assholes are reporting this as inaccurate? or is that KRose doing it?
    • firstpost, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Yeah, I hate those shouty, all-caps comments.
    • awesometastic1, on 07/10/2008, -3/+1shouts are the only reason digg still exists. it is impossible for any story to make the frontpage without them. there are simply too many submissions per minute.
    • onestep, on 07/10/2008, -0/+2I had to look for about 10 minutes to find this story...... it was like 4 pages from the front... and over 3,000 diggs. Whats this site coming to ? :-).
    • diggrnumber1, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3i use shouts, and i agree. i would rather not have to use them to get anyone to look at any of my submissions. it would save me a lot of time, and it would make digg more fair.
  • rsHoratio, on 07/09/2008, -46/+1357Kevin if you are reading this: "Hi kevin!"
    • Monkeydew06, on 07/09/2008, -40/+68D*... "hi Kevin...."
    • mnetlucas, on 07/09/2008, -63/+2If you dig this down you don't get the reference...
    • kevinisnthere, on 07/09/2008, -14/+272Hi. What's up?
      • bluezinc, on 07/09/2008, -52/+4... you're not kevin rose...
      • hazza18, on 07/09/2008, -33/+10Incase you didn't know Mr Clevar. He said Hi kevin. The person that replied username is kevinisnthere.
      • iofthestorm, on 07/09/2008, -5/+39...very observant...
      • bluezinc, on 07/09/2008, -27/+3I was kidding digg, seriously. The bury brigade is out in full force today.
    • ThatDustyGuy, on 07/09/2008, -8/+335A cartoon representation of you saying hi to Kevin:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1CPKhAxPyU
      • franciscofelipe, on 07/09/2008, -23/+4i've never seen a sponge talking to a picles before.
      • ayeroxor, on 07/09/2008, -7/+34I've never actually seen someone seem smart enough to use a computer yet totally when it came to how to spell the word 'pickle'.
      • adasha, on 07/09/2008, -1/+36I've never actually seen someone capable of pointing out errors in spelling miss out crucial verbs in a sentence while still getting the point across
      • aenima987, on 07/09/2008, -1/+68I have to say, this was one of the best and most relevant video reply to a comment I have ever seen.
        I guess knowing every Spongebob episode inside and out helps you a bit.
      • itspuddingtime, on 07/09/2008, -0/+9totally.....?
      • damnclem, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5Edited for putting this in the wrong place. EYE SOOO STOOPID!
      • ayeroxor, on 07/09/2008, -5/+3Yeah, yeah, at least I can spell pickle, even if I ***** up when I revise a post :P
      • Monkeydew06, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2That's what I was going for, Digg didn't like it much though....
      • Disease, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Was not expecting that at all.
      • bjarki, on 07/10/2008, -7/+3after seeing this funny video there was another "hi Kevin" video there that is soooo much better, just not in the same way ;)
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCzPFrRAlfw&NR=1
      • frozenpxl, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3I did not make this.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5iAYVIxaTk&feature ...
    • RobotLeAwesome, on 07/09/2008, -12/+65we all know that Kevin doesn't even know what Digg is.
    • thegreenspanput, on 07/09/2008, -33/+6Rose & Adleman banned suzywang3000 when suzy had not violated the digg TOS. Over 1500 comments, 76 fans and then "presto - you're gone".

      They should get kicked out the country.
      • shortyjacobs, on 07/09/2008, -5/+22Bout time she got banned....Couldn't stand her.
      • RealmDown, on 07/09/2008, -4/+16Hear, hear!

        She was offensive to the senses.
      • thegreenspanput, on 07/09/2008, -25/+2oh shut up, RealmDown... go back to China where you belong, you anti-free_speech commie.
      • MacEnvy, on 07/09/2008, -2/+6Yeah, I'm pretty sure suzy was banned due to popular demand.
      • vault, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5She was a pretty obvious troll though, in fairness.
      • someone173406, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3I hated that troll, wouldn't shut up for even a second.
    • dbhalla, on 07/09/2008, -18/+9If you are reading this "Hi mum!"
    • Roger, on 07/09/2008, -22/+3Who is this "Kevin"?

      Kevin Kline? Kevin Costner?
    • pinkdigg, on 07/09/2008, -8/+3OoOo look he did! Go be happy now.
    • damnclem, on 07/09/2008, -8/+3This is possibly the greatest comment thread on digg. Well done to all involved. :D
    • bs0l, on 07/10/2008, -1/+10Who's Kevin Rose?
    • rsHoratio, on 07/10/2008, -4/+4holy ***** I am ***** famous on the internet!
      • bobkingof12vs, on 07/10/2008, -1/+2you almost won an internet. then you lost it. good job
    • AmICoolNow, on 07/10/2008, -1/+6What the hell? Kevin actually dugg your comment!
  • fatbyjhnsn, on 07/09/2008, -52/+196Here's the original story. Don't let Digg censor! Digg it!

    http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_Constitution ...
    • tonaros, on 07/09/2008, -1/+53Made popular 10 minutes ago.
    • AWBoy666, on 07/09/2008, -18/+6I do agree that Digg censors stories (I had one with 200 diggs in 2 hours that didn't make it and another with 800 diggs in 4 hours that didn't make it).

      But this IS NOT a case of it. Many people, including myself, do not agree with the article and have buried it as inaccurate. This is actually a case of the Digg algorithm being correct and not broken.

      Sorry that the world doesn't always agree with you liberal nutballs!
      • graderguy, on 07/09/2008, -10/+16OK, Mr. Conservative Nutball. Let me explain something to you. I'll talk r e a l slow so you understand:
        Disagreeing with something is NOT the same thing as calling it "inaccurate". If there are inaccuracies, point them out so we might discuss them. You simply buried it because it went against your world-view. I have dugg MANY articles I did not agree with, and expressed my disagreements in the comment section, like this! But I sort of like freedom and the exchange of ideas and stuff like that. So I try to listen, even to folks i do not agree with. Sometimes they have valid points. Digging up interesting, controversial articles is one way to cause more discourse and the possibility of learning something new, or changing a long held opinion based on new information. Since you are commenting and apparently reading this stuff, I feel certain you are literate, but did you not notice that this is (properly) placed in the Political OPINION section?
        Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. But you don't have to BE an *****.
        ps.. i even dugg your comment UP.. how about THAT??
      • AWBoy666, on 07/09/2008, -5/+4I'm not even going to justify your ill-conceived rant by finishing reading it.

        The fact that the front page of Digg is so viciously liberal should alert you to the fact that your left-wing friends tend to digg down pretty much anything they disagree with. I reserve the right to digg down an article that says that "The Constitution is Dead" when that is completely not true. Not even a view of my own, but the truth. The Constitution still exists, although our rights protected by it may have apparantly been degraded slightly.

        I, as a conservative supporter, don't like the bill that was passed today at all, but I would not go to the extent of saying that the Constitution is dead, because it simply isn't true.

        Reign yourself in and look at fact, not your emotions.
      • graderguy, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2That really bunched up your panties.
        "The Constitution still exists, although our rights protected by it may have apparantly been degraded slightly."
        Slightly degraded ? OK, not dead, but "slightly degraded". I like that. And I dugg you up again.
        And again, since you didn't read through the first time,
        "Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. But you don't have to BE an *****. "

    • XanderDee, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3That's the whole point of digg.
    • RomanThommassen, on 07/09/2008, -14/+8***** kevin rose.... HERE I SAID IT.
      • Millsee, on 07/09/2008, -0/+14how brave.
      • sgregory416, on 07/09/2008, -7/+2at least somebody has a mind of they're own.
      • Millsee, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1"At least somebody has a mind of they are own"

        You said it, not me...
    • twertyto, on 07/09/2008, -5/+4That's the top story ATM.

      Buried as inaccurate.
    • techblogLAT, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3Funny enough, we had a conference call with Digg yesterday, and one of the guys mentioned the story as one of the "mysteries of the Digg algorithm."
      • Defuser, on 07/09/2008, -7/+2Dude, you seriously need a girlfriend if you're having "conference calls" with Digg.
    • Stormwern, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5Digg censorship is turning into the new truther movement, why would they censor this article and not the dozen others on the exact same theme. The digg engine is broken, I agree, but let's not go ***** here.
    • geoff1210, on 07/09/2008, -2/+3Ugh. I blocked politics from my digg a while back. I am tired of the truthers, rabid obama fans, and other such articles that were filling my front page.

      It's nice to have technology, gaming, business and comedy news, without all that spam.
      • IcyNinja, on 07/14/2008, -0/+1Same here. Digg is most certainly not the place to go if you want unbiased news. However it is a great place to stay up to date on technology and general web culture.
    • mbraynard, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Perhaps if the people who were digging it also dugg things other than Ron Paul stories, it would have been on the home page a LOT faster. That's how the algorithym works.

      So forget about submissions a moment. If you want stories you DIGG to get to the home page, spend some time digging content from other sections. Like the Yahtzee game review or You Suck at PhotoShop or something.
    • Fordi, on 07/10/2008, -1/+1Two points:
      1) Diggs are weighted; users' diggs carry differential weight based on their past activity
      2) Buries are not counted towards Digg total.

  • nelsonjs, on 07/09/2008, -18/+77Other relevant Diggs.

    http://digg.com/world_news/WTF_digg_8
    http://digg.com/odd_stuff/TechCrunch_acknowledges_ ...
    http://digg.com/tech_news/Gosh_How_Many_Diggs_Does ... he_Home_Page
  • BackEnThaWomb, on 07/09/2008, -4/+158And why, when I go back to the upcoming tab, do I need to click All for type and All for category EVERY TIME, why doesn't it just default to it?
    • deadfrank, on 07/09/2008, -3/+4click on the digg emblem in the top left corner of the page, takes you to the main again
    • gelato822, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8yeah, but then you have to click upcoming again.
    • TheSexyGeek, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7God Almighty! I thought I was the only one. I love the recommendation engine, it has made my far more active on Digg, but the category thing pisses me off every time.
    • kevinrose, on 07/09/2008, -6/+49Yep, fixing this, thanks!
    • Justin6512, on 07/10/2008, -1/+4and why don't you see the big letters next to upcoming that say "beta"

      they're working on it, Kevin said it himself when they released the video talking about it. He said something along the lines of that it will take a while to get it right.
  • JasonCox, on 07/09/2008, -11/+422Dugg because the mob said if I signed it they'd give me a pitchfork and a torch.
    • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -4/+49Out the door.. Line on the left... One pitchfork each.
      • Zemenar, on 07/09/2008, -2/+38Pitchforks? Dugg!
      • Lugano, on 07/09/2008, -1/+9I have a cricket bat instead
      • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -9/+1*A. Cricket. Bat.* Ok. That's kind of 'faggy' but it is, in fact, the most effective of the swinging type weapons!
      • Pssdoff, on 07/09/2008, -0/+11Alright, we're out of torches...

        From now on everyone is going to have to get flaming pitchforks... Line on the left... One flamefork each.
      • sglazier, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3Actually, they said I can go free and live on an island somewere
      • DemDude, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Okay, Flameforks are alright, but I really just wanted a torch!
      • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -3/+1OH! I see. Well, just torches are the other line. *lahaaammeee*

        "I can has buries?" *lahaammmer*
    • nfulton, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5Buy your own damned pitch fork. They are expensive. We will provide sticks, tar and fire for torches.

      Jeeze.
    • Toffeeapple, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1I logged in just to digg you : ) you made me laugh, thanx.
    • NinjaPirateDude, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1dude, torches are the *****!
    • huyzee, on 07/10/2008, -0/+5you'd think we'd get shovels
  • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -26/+17Here's an 'open(ed)' letter:

    "Dear Kevin and Alex,
    I had a really great time at the Grove. Your profile description was all that it was *cracked* (lol) up to be, and more -- I was very satisfied with your services.
    TTYL,
    {redacted} "

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-vFiuqCazE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFl5mH6mo2c&feature ...
    • dukeeeey, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3yeah i cringed when i read about the fact they had been to the grove
      the digg guys are literally part of the system the people are fighting against

      This probably explains why digg is filled with trivial ***** now, with almost no real news or important stuff.
  • ophello, on 07/09/2008, -6/+239Digg needs a panic button.
  • postalblowfish7, on 07/09/2008, -31/+24Digg needs to block traffic from 4chan.
    • Elliottx, on 07/09/2008, -4/+5I agree completely.
    • Pittance, on 07/09/2008, -6/+1You mean redirects? Because a website can't find what sites you've been to recently unless you have spyware.
    • versualize, on 07/09/2008, -16/+2Explain to me how that would work. There's no HTML on 4chan, so you can't really block incoming links (as there wouldn't be any). Also, 4channers make Digg more fun.

      supporting 4chan? Digg this comment down...
    • fani, on 07/09/2008, -0/+15Sorry, I don't want any censorship on digg by digg. Anything can be submitted.

      I would however, want expanded features so that I can censor unwanted content myself.
      • postalblowfish7, on 07/09/2008, -1/+3not the content - the users. idiots from 4chan who are very confused over the definition of "random" digg up nothing but dumb ***** and email forwards.
      • RobotLeAwesome, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2let me reiterate my previous statement for you postalblowfish7

        Longcat is long.
  • Truzseeker, on 07/09/2008, -14/+72Operates similar to mainstream media. Dumb irrelevant distracting nonsense stories get front page posts. Anything of any news value takes a back seat.
    • thescimitar, on 07/09/2008, -1/+13That's because the mainstream media and Digg do the exact same thing: they bow to the lowest common denominator. One does it through the market, the other does it through a fancy algorithm and a mob of users... but face it, Digg is not what it once was. It is now the mob, and it is hungry for fluff.
    • Serris, on 07/09/2008, -7/+8Right, and sensationalistic blogs like "The Constitution Dies Tomorrow" have -so- much value. Have fun digging me down, sheeple.
    • The_Red_Monkey, on 07/09/2008, -1/+6The diggers power this site so the stories about boobs and beer that make it to the frontpage now show the intellect of the diggers themselves. So instead of yelling at everyone just stand in front of a mirror and yell at yourself. Digg has gotten too popular and now its ruled by a group of idiots promoting blogs for $$.
    • a8ksh4, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Does that mean everything's perfect if the put the "back seat" upcoming page on the front page?
    • KlassyGuy, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1I'd say what a better site was for stories, but I don't want all the beer upmodding trolls to go there. Find the alien... there's a clue. And the other site is open source, if you don't like what makes it to the front page, change it. It's up to you.
  • bloodypython, on 07/09/2008, -7/+297digg isn't the only thing broken.....mirror?


    • kevinwiz, on 07/09/2008, -2/+10I always wondered why things continue to get dugg after they go down. You mean people don't always read the stories they digg? no way!
      • TyCage, on 07/09/2008, -0/+14I will sometimes digg a story when the site is down as a way of marking it so I can find the story later, when the site might be up again.
  • BCCStu, on 07/09/2008, -14/+7Ridiculous.
  • jstohler, on 07/09/2008, -7/+84It finally made the homepage with over 1,000 diggs.
    • nelsonjs, on 07/09/2008, -3/+40With over 1,600 Diggs actually.
    • sexybobo, on 07/09/2008, -5/+26Just has a lot of people burying it.
      • Hypersapien, on 07/09/2008, -12/+7Why the hell are people buying this? Do they WANT facism?
      • AegisSailor, on 07/09/2008, -14/+14Maybe because we don't all believe that the big bad evil freely-elected government is out to get us.
      • iofthestorm, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2Too bad there's no way we can see if that's actually true...
      • MavRevMatt, on 07/09/2008, -0/+10Except there is no way we can prove that. Buries need to be as viewable as diggs are. Right now there is no way for anyone to know who is burying something and for what reason.
      • kevinwiz, on 07/09/2008, -5/+4@AegisSailor
        remind me again how bush was elected in 2000? oh that's right, he was appointed by a judge. gore won the election, but that doesn't count.


        and ***** the comment system for making me say @AegisSailor why can't I just reply to that comment
      • sexybobo, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5@kevinwiz
        I believe he won the most states 30 to 20.
        he wasn't the first presidant to loose popular and win the presidency.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_preside ...
      • GhostyBoy, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3@MattRevMatt: The reason we don't know is to avoid digg becoming an epic flame war.
      • ghostoftomjoad, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1@sexybobo

        You are wrong. Gore also won the electoral college. That is why they were in the middle of a recount which the supreme court called off and then called by itself. Every newspaper agreed that Gore would have won a recount by landslide and should have been sworn in
    • dn11, on 07/09/2008, -2/+2yeah! I've never seen a story like this on the front page before! never!.... stories whining about how digg sucks never get front paged on digg! fight the power!....
    • abbymats, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0so finally diggers won ....digg u better learn some thing from this and if it was not intentional ....its time to tweak the algo so that this doesn't gets repeated
  • xeno439, on 07/09/2008, -19/+14Yeah, Kevin . . . dude . . . fix this *****.
  • darkchild82, on 07/09/2008, -10/+56Is there an option where I can turn off the Recommendation engine or at least be given the preference to see the Upcoming list first instead of what Digg thinks I would like?
  • ginestony, on 07/09/2008, -2/+20I can't access either of these stories... site is down.
  • KnightMareInc, on 07/09/2008, -19/+66try not spamming digg
    • jer2eydevil88, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8I stopped submitting articles to Digg recently because even though I have been able to get to the front page in the past it is now next to impossible. Digg is broken and its taken the fun out of it.
      • SoCalMario, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5yeah you are right. Stories arent begin dugg based on the quality of the content, It's more on who you know and how many people you are popular with. Ive submitted plenty of good stuff and at most I get maybe two diggs. Then I see stupid jpgs with one wannabe funny saying and there is like so many diggs. I just don't get it. Digg is changing for the worst.
      • pirateandy, on 07/09/2008, -1/+3hear hear, welcome to Digg High School
  • insanemike, on 07/09/2008, -12/+35If the same group of people is shouting stories to one another, of course it's going to take more diggs for it to hit the homepage. Spammers can also operate in groups of 1000.
  • zyl0x, on 07/09/2008, -5/+25It's funny how all three of these stories became frontpaged within 20 minutes of each other....
  • ratbear, on 07/09/2008, -59/+135This is the reason I don't view political stories on digg. Quit your ***** whining, JESUS ***** CHRIST. The person who penned this open letter and others like him are the one's ruining digg with your annoying sense of entitlement.
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -9/+13no digg has been in a steady decline since the 'new comment system' more than a year ago. but krose laces it with electronic crack so we keep coming back
    • Serris, on 07/09/2008, -3/+15Agreed.
    • quomen, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7Double agreed. Politics was blocked a long time ago for me. It was the best thing I could've done on this site.
    • moxley, on 07/09/2008, -8/+3No, ***** you kindly sir - this is important, you can get all of the ***** soft news (like I guess you like, ***** about Paris Hilton, Britney and Brangelina) on mainstream news networks.

      Digg is supposed to be about users making stories popular based on what people want to see, not manipulation of the system for marketing or censorship purposes.
    • celkin, on 07/09/2008, -1/+1*ones
    • all_about_the_D, on 07/09/2008, -1/+7here, here. honestly, the site is called digg, meaning you dig for those cool stories. who gives a ***** if the whole world doesn't see that story dugg by a couple thousand users. don't like it? suck it up princess.
      • wonderbriefs, on 07/09/2008, -1/+1Um, it's called Digg meaning, "I digg it. If you digg it too, then more people will find cool *****."
    • sconnor, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2It's supposed to be about the #'s...& if people don't pay attn. to what's happening in DC & around the US our world will drastically change as we know it!! Then all whining will be forced underground.
  • cutekelvins, on 07/09/2008, -12/+7diggs or it didnt happen.
    • Goombellaofgoom, on 07/09/2008, -3/+4The problem is that it *got* the diggs, but still didn't happen.
  • Wootstapler, on 07/09/2008, -8/+33Obviously not if this made front page with less than 300 diggs. Kthxbi.
    • xeno439, on 07/09/2008, -1/+3obviously time is a key component in the algo
      The other one took over a day. This took a few hours.
  • captaindigger, on 07/09/2008, -4/+44I think the "Recommendations in Upcoming" is broke. I keep getting recommendations for Viagra articles. Or maybe it's trying to tell me something? WTF?
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -1/+12i keep getting troofer stories and iPhone spam but I have found some cool stuff there too. its almost like its recommending stuff for me to bury and digg
      • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -4/+1"troofer"? Perhaps you should be recommended more anti-fluoride stories to help you with that lisp of yours.
      • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4troofer is a derogatory term for truther
      • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -5/+1@mikesbaker:
        "O Really?!!"
    • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -0/+12It's trying to tell you something.
    • RealmDown, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3"Upcoming" is no longer accurate in what is about to hit the front page.
    • cesclaveria, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4and I'm getting way too many golf and tennis stories, I don't like those sports.
      • benman587, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Click the "Customize" button at the top of the page and you can remove any topics you're not interested in.
  • EvilCan, on 07/09/2008, -2/+48Kevin is going have a hard time reading this letter that someone wrote to him if the site doesn't work.
  • noob, on 07/09/2008, -18/+21The story was already made popular. Stop crying.
  • slightlyoffbeat, on 07/09/2008, -5/+75out of curiosity...what happens if a story gets 1000 diggs, but 2000 people bury it?
    • noob, on 07/09/2008, -0/+15It goes off the front page.
      • slightlyoffbeat, on 07/09/2008, -4/+6and what would happen if an upcoming story had the same number of people burying it as digging it?
      • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -2/+16You can have 90 'diggs' in 2 hours and 4 buries will kill it sometimes. {see-"bury brigade"}
      • TheSnuffster, on 07/09/2008, -0/+22Digg's servers would crash whilst trying to divide by zero.
      • elhaf, on 07/09/2008, -1/+1Not all diggs/buries are created equal. Success breeds success. Some pigs are more equal than others.
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -1/+32that is classified
    • philostrato, on 07/09/2008, -3/+8exactly! that's the thing. i bet that story just got buried a lot.
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -7/+4i buried it
    • avgbody, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2it would drop to 0 (1000 - 2000)? at least that is what i always assumed
    • celkin, on 07/09/2008, -1/+8The internet divides by zero...and then asplodes.
    • doublebummer, on 07/10/2008, -1/+5then it magically transforms from a story into a conspiracy theory
      • ghostoftomjoad, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1i think this story should have hit the front page earlier but i admit I had to laugh at that
    • calcio0fan, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1
  • CasaMan, on 07/09/2008, -30/+38Burred inaccurate.. Digg works perfectly fine for me.
  • warchant, on 07/09/2008, -15/+48buried...go outside!
    • freebird09, on 07/09/2008, -3/+8Kind of hard when you're stuck in an office all day. X/
      • gl77, on 07/09/2008, -6/+4oh poor you. get a real ***** job, Milton.
      • freebird09, on 07/10/2008, -0/+0I'm 17, I'm a summer intern, I don't have time for a "real job" so ***** off.
    • DeadBabySoup, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1yes, haven't you learned how to leave comments on digg without a computer?!?!
    • tufftugg, on 07/10/2008, -1/+2 What and ruin my pasty white appearance I started in CS class, no way!
  • yellowsnowcone, on 07/09/2008, -2/+20don't know about Digg, but his server is certainly broken
  • frenchkick, on 07/09/2008, -4/+15yeah...speak yourself...im not that angry about it
    actually i don't really care
  • Linkin4, on 07/09/2008, -29/+88BIG ***** DEAL

  • gordonp, on 07/09/2008, -12/+5Over 250 diggs and plenty of comments, but never frontpaged?
    http://digg.com/world_news/Scientologist_Tommy_Dav ...
  • xsecretfiles, on 07/09/2008, -12/+1...I doubt kevin works at all

    Complain to his IT department

    kthanksbie
  • kevinrose, on 07/09/2008, -44/+782Hi All - As we've discussed in the past (see link below) there are a number of factors that go into story promotion. A few specific factors affecting this story were diversity of digging activity, the number of buries in relation to Diggs, and the overall increase in Diggs that are occurring on the site recently. This story was an outlier case which happens from time to time, but it did eventually reach the home page. Sorry for the confusion.

    More info: http://blog.digg.com/?p=106
    • slightlyoffbeat, on 07/09/2008, -10/+133and there is your answer digg
      • Snuff99, on 07/09/2008, -11/+2now stew foo, ya babies.
      • brjohnson789, on 07/09/2008, -14/+4wtf ever, all I know is a controversial story should have made it to the front page for all i know (and no I don't know how they 'weight' diggs/buries), there was a bunch of bitching, and now 'voila' the story is there.
      • tama00, on 07/10/2008, -1/+6so what are you guys doing for lunch?
      • ruddy, on 07/10/2008, -0/+15your mom
    • frenchkick, on 07/09/2008, -7/+38there...you can all rest easy now...justice is done
      • Larsonal777, on 07/10/2008, -6/+3Yes... I love how digg gets compleeeetely riled up when it seems something is unfair towards democrats... even though the VAST majority of ALLL the front page stories are democratic... wow.. that is all i can say... wow... I swear people are loud complainers growing up... then when responsibility comes they quiet down and become MORE conservative. Notice the more... that doesn't mean you ARE conservative... just that I've notice people shift right as they get older/get more responsibilities.
    • potterboy, on 07/09/2008, -29/+21Thanks for clearing that up, but I'm still a little unconvinced.
    • FTWmovin2canada, on 07/09/2008, -51/+10Holy crap and Kevin posts a comment.
      • ericdano, on 07/09/2008, -15/+4Yeah, it will be another 6 months to a year until you see another........
      • FTWmovin2canada, on 07/09/2008, -33/+5I'm actually getting dugg down for being surprised seeing the founder of digg commenting? Wow, my mistake.
      • jobobshishkabob, on 07/09/2008, -2/+25You are getting dugg down because it's not that uncommon.
    • ILoveVerdi, on 07/09/2008, -8/+36Great, now everyone can stop flipping out.
    • jaymzdean, on 07/09/2008, -26/+4If I'm not mistaken, the number of diggs shown for each digg article is NET.
      That is, the number of buries has already been factored in.
      So how, exactly, does this explain anything?
      • benman587, on 07/09/2008, -1/+7The number of buries does not change the Digg count. I think Reddit does it that way.
      • crodulfo, on 07/09/2008, -2/+7so its not like the comment digg buttons?
        why not?
      • RealmDown, on 07/09/2008, -3/+13Then there needs to be a bury counter.
      • gavin422, on 07/09/2008, -2/+3@RealmDown: I originally dugg you because I like the idea, but now I'm not so sure. There is already so much mob mentality at Digg - people digg stories because other people digg them. Do we really want them doing the same for buries?
    • worminater, on 07/09/2008, -41/+129Stupid conspiracy theorists. Get a life.
      • Kronk42583, on 07/09/2008, -8/+5its idiot like these that make me want to kill myself every time there is a monster quest or UFO files on the history channel, a once addictive and great channel.
      • droog9277, on 07/09/2008, -2/+22where is buzz aldrin when you need him..?
    • mhender, on 07/09/2008, -34/+20Buried.
      Take THAT kevinrose.
    • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -32/+12that's a pretty weak answer IMHO
      • yayintertubes, on 07/09/2008, -6/+11Any answer at all is better than most sites would give.
      • mikesbaker, on 07/09/2008, -6/+1so true
    • sodoh, on 07/09/2008, -8/+2What I am finding annoying is that the story list stuff is appearing and disappearing. What is in the top list is not in anyway related to what I would normally read (it was before). In fact most of it appears to be spam related.

      Seems to be a little better today.
    • yayintertubes, on 07/09/2008, -25/+11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _________
      . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./ It's a Trap!
      . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _,,,--~~~~~~~~--,_ . . . . .. . . _______/
      . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ : : : :::: :::: :: : : : : :º ‘-, . . . . /. . . . . . . .
      . . . . . . . . . . . . .,-‘ :: : : :::: :::: :::: :::: : : :0 : ‘-, . . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ :: ::: :: : : :: :::: :::: :: : : : : :O ‘-, . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . . . . . . .,-‘ : :: :: :: :: :: : : : : : , : : :º :::: :::: ::’; . . . . . . . .
      . . . . . . . . .,-‘ / / : :: :: :: :: : : :::: :::-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ; . . . . . . . .
      . . . . . . . . /,-‘,’ :: : : : : : : : : :: :: :: : ‘-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;;| . . . . . . .
      . . . . . . . /,’,-‘ :: :: :: :: :: :: :: : ::_,-~~,_’-, ;; ;; ;; ;; | . . . . . . .
      . . . . . _/ :,’ :/ :: :: :: : : :: :: _,-‘/ : ,-‘;’-‘’’’’~-, ;; ;; ;;,’ . . . . . . . .
      . . . ,-‘ / : : : : : : ,-‘’’ : : :,--‘’ ;|| /,-‘-‘--‘’’__,’’’ ;; ;,-‘ . . . . . . . .
      . . . :/,, : : : _,-‘ --,,_ : : : ||/ /,-‘-‘x### :: ;;/ . . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . / /---‘’’’ : # : : : : : | | : (O##º : :/ /-‘’ . . . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . /,’____ : : ‘-# : , : : : : ‘-,___,-‘,-`-,, . . . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . ‘ ) : : : :’’’’--,,--,,,,,,¯ :: ::--,,_’’-,,’’’¯ :’- :’-, . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . .) : : : : : : ,, : ‘’’’~~~~’ :: :: :: :’’’’’¯ :: ,-‘ :,/ . . . . . . . . .
      . . . . .,/ /|\| | :/ / : : : : : : : ,’-, :: :: :: :: ::,--‘’ :,-‘ . . . . . . . .
      . . . . .\’|\ |/ ‘/ / :: :_--,, : , | )’; :: :: :: :,-‘’ : ,-‘ : : : , . . . . . . .
      . . . ./¯ ;| | : |/ :: ::----, :/ ;|/ :: :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : ‘’-,,_ . . . .
      . . ..| : : :/ ‘’-(, :: :: :: ‘’’’’~,,,,,’’ :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : : : :,-‘’’\ . . . .
      . ,-‘ : : : | : : ‘’) : : :¯’’’’~-,: : ,--‘’’ : :,-‘’ : : : : : : : : : ,-‘ :¯’’’’’-,_ .
      ./ : : : : :’-, :: | :: :: :: _,,-‘’’’¯ : ,--‘’ : : : : : : : : : : : / : : : : : : :’’-,
      / : : : : : -, :¯’’’’’’’’’’’¯ : : _,,-~’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : ;| : : : : : : : : :
      : : : : : : : :¯’’~~~~~~’’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : | : : : : : : : : :
    • moethelawn, on 07/09/2008, -13/+76Kevin Rose has spoketh
      • Kronk42583, on 07/09/2008, -5/+17i think you mean kevin rose did spake.
      • Hangly, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8spake, did speak or hath spoken.
    • theparaiba, on 07/09/2008, -23/+62"A few specific factors affecting this story were diversity of digging activity"

      That's it ronpaulites, please go away. Nobody cares about your candidate anymore, not even the Digg algorithm. Feel free to digg me down and prove me right.
    • Herv3, on 07/09/2008, -16/+7Hey Kevin. I'm a fan of the site and I appreciate he response. I still think there is a flaw though, if the original site in question is getting over 1000 diggs and doesn't hit the front page.
      • jobobshishkabob, on 07/09/2008, -1/+10And he answered that. It wasn't getting there because a whole bunch of people were burying it.
      • Herv3, on 07/09/2008, -10/+1I get that, but I still think that is a flaw with the site. One of the things I like about Digg is it's about what people are into and promoting things, not being able to bury things.
      • wicketr, on 07/09/2008, -2/+5That is a design feature. Not a flaw, or a bug. If you don't like it, then find a new site. And FYI, I'm burying you.
      • Braxo, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8So if 1000 people dugg a story and 5000 people buried a story you still think it should hit the front page because it got over 1000 diggs?
      • Herv3, on 07/09/2008, -4/+2Where are you getting that number from? Did the story get burried by 5000 users? Where did you even get that number from? I didn't say that a 5-1 burried to digg ratio shouldn't be a factor.
      • Braxo, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3I just pulled the 5000 number to make my point. Obviously I am not sure how the Digg algorithm weighs Buried votes. But before we get angry and start pointing fingers at Digg censoring articles, maybe you should take into account that if a story receives a certain percentage of Bury votes then it becomes much more difficult to be elevated to the front page.

        Unfortunately Digg users only see how many Diggs a story received and not Bury votes. If we saw the behind the scene calculations I'm sure we'd both have a better understanding on how articles hit the front page.
    • dracostimpy, on 07/09/2008, -35/+26Anything that has over 1000 diggs and still wasn't frontpaged is "evidence of our promotion algorithm hard at" FAIL. Unless digg suddenly added a quarter million users this week, any story with 1k+ diggs is pretty damn popular compared to the average of maybe 500 or so diggs that the average front-paged article gets AFTER being promoted. This was the average frontpage article times two and it was still NOT on the frontpage.

      This story may not have been "diverse" enough because the neocon bury brigade most certainly had at it, but 1k+ diggs is fairly obviously frontpage-worthy. I can only hope that your "diversity screening engine" looks as closely at those who do the burying as it does those who do the digging, though I fear that's not the case since I highly doubt there's as many FISA supporters as opponents on this website. LGF maybe, but digg... not so much.

      I'm not suggesting there should be a specific minimum threshold # of diggs, but there has to be some common sense injected into it as well. How about this: You take 10 random frontpagers from the previous day since they've pretty much gone through their life cycle at that point (tossing out any of the 5k+ megastories that would skew the average), add up all the diggs they combined for and divide it by 10. If ANY upcoming story has more diggs than the average # of diggs from those frontpagers the day before, it's frontpage-worthy (omitting obvious gaming/spam of course, which the compellingly newsworthy FISA cave-in story is clearly NOT). For the record, I waive my intellectual property rights on that idea, so just friggin do it and end this madness!
      • Stwo, on 07/09/2008, -3/+3you make it sound so easy.... I find it hard to believe it's that simple
      • dracostimpy, on 07/09/2008, -1/+6I'm not saying it's easy, but this was an obvious problem with the algorithm since this story is clearly newsworthy and had 3x as many diggs as the average frontpager gets in its whole life cycle.

        Digg's been around long enough now that it should have at least worked out such obvious flaws, but this instead reaffirms my suspicion that buries are given far too much weight and far too little screening, since a single bury seems to count against a hundred diggs. I'm all for self-censorship to eliminate crap and spam, but digg needs to consider the motivations of its censors just as much as it does its submitters. It's obvious that a profoundly impacting political story like this is being buried for reasons other than it being spam or non-news.

        Perhaps the bury algorithm should be uniquely applied to political news given the fact that these stories are routinely buried for ideological rather than practical reasons... I'm not sure. What I do know is that this clearly is news and when over 1000 diggers agree, it ought to be on the frontpage regardless of # of buries when the average frontpager needs only ~300 diggs. I have faith they'll work it out since digg has proven itself responsive in the past and they know well enough that the internet is a fickle marketplace.
    • Darmichar, on 07/09/2008, -3/+59This is the perfect example of the Digg count needing to actively reflect buries as well. People see that big fat number and automatically assume it should be front paged. If every bury counted as a negative vote and was actively reflected as such, this story would have shown (I'm assuming) a relatively low Digg count and there wouldn't have been a problem.
      • gavin422, on 07/09/2008, -3/+7But buries aren't counted as negative votes because there are many, many more diggs on the site than buries. What matters is the ratio of diggs to buries.
      • squirrelnutz, on 07/09/2008, -1/+24Agreed, each bury should be shown just like it is in the comment section!
      • ILoveVerdi, on 07/10/2008, -2/+1Isn't that how reddit works?
    • floatingorb, on 07/09/2008, -16/+4I'm a fascist. So congragulations for your part in throwing Ron Paul and 9/11 truth 'under the bus.'
      • noonions, on 07/10/2008, -0/+2I'm a regular person. So congratulations on spelling "congratulations" wrong and making an idiot out of yourself with a completely unrelated comment.
    • rareblue, on 07/09/2008, -10/+16Democracy is not working on Digg. Diggs power users run the show and you won't release bury numbers to prove weather bury brigades are at work. Digg will tell you that your story has been buried but why or by who buried them.
    • indiefan, on 07/09/2008, -2/+62Why don't you just show the number of buries on the story page so we all know what's going on?
      • Stwo, on 07/09/2008, -1/+42I agree.... # of buries should definitely be shown.
      • XombieRobot, on 07/09/2008, -8/+3Anyone noticed that this funtion is available for our comments? That's pretty neat.
      • liza, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1agreed
    • Butros, on 07/09/2008, -10/+4Hey Kevin when you digg someone up or down does it count like 10 diggs? Like "POW POW POW POWER DIGG!"... anyway maybe a feature in the next version could be a bury breakdown report, where it would show how many times the submission was buried and also for what reason (eg 54 buries "OK This was Lame", 45 buries "Innacurate"). Good site and podcast man, hope you cash in for that 60 million soon ;)
    • djepik, on 07/09/2008, -9/+3Wow, a link to a blog post from January 23rd.

      Thanks for the slap in the face.

      Don't you think there should be a threshold at which a story gets promoted, regardless of diversity?

      You cannot tell me this was not a ridiculous situation, that could easily be prevented.
    • BedPost, on 07/09/2008, -1/+32But in all seriousness, can you get rid of shouts? They do nothing other than create an oligarchy of top submitters.
    • avengingturnip, on 07/09/2008, -0/+29This is probably a dumb question but it is one that begs to be asked. Are buries weighted by diversity similarly to diggs? For instance if I am part of a "bury brigade" and I spy an article I want buried deeper than Pompeii under Vesuvius' ash so I tell all my friends does the algorithm diminish the impact of individual buries by others on my friends list or does it, unlike diggs, treat them as if they are independent of each other?
      • kemp34, on 07/09/2008, -1/+8Great question turnip.
      • DemDude, on 07/09/2008, -7/+1You're part of a what?! Get a life!
      • DemDude, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4I misread the "if". My bad, bury me.
      • sparsely, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3Another important question is, what is diversity to the algorithm, and how is it calculated?
        Is it based on your friends? "Diggers like me" (top match: 18%)? Something else?
        Even reddit claims to be open-source, yet we're clueless as to the real workings of teh algorithm, all for the excuse that someone may use the knowledge to "game" the system. Well, it's being gamed already, why no fix it?
      • avengingturnip, on 07/10/2008, -1/+3They will probably never make public the details of the diversity algorithm but they d@mn sure ought to make it apply equally to buries as well as diggs.
    • ZeRux, on 07/09/2008, -2/+9I'm still astonished on how this story reached the front page within 1 1/2 hours and it took more than a day for the other one as they were probably dugg by same people.
      • worminater, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2it has digg in the title; and is conspiracy theory; of course it will get dug.
    • rolfeman02, on 07/09/2008, -5/+19Thanks for not being a dick when a bunch of people are being dicks to you
    • krekc, on 07/09/2008, -9/+2Oh MY..GOD!! KEVIN KEV.....IN......KEVIN OMG OMG OMG
    • TnTBass, on 07/09/2008, -5/+4Kevin's answer actually didn't answer a damn question (besides putting conspiracy theories to rest). The story itself says the same thing Kevin did. What I want to know, is how specifically this story did not make it to the FP sooner? Was it lack of diversity? Was it the digg/bury ratio?

      I think we ALL know the algorithm was the cause of this story not reaching the FP, but what diggers want is an explanation of how that algorithm got manipulated (intentionally or unintentionally) to keep this story off the front page. Perhaps the fear is that the information can be used to intentionally manipulate stories to reach the FP (or not) but it looks to me like that has already happened.

      Digg me down for questioning Kevin.
      • elhaf, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7The more we know about exactly how the algorithm works and exactly what causes its anomalies especially, the easier it is to game the system. And believe me, there are huge factions of people aiming to game the system. I wish they would go form their own website.
      • dracostimpy, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1It seems more and more apparent to me that the purpose of digg is to replicate the meaningless fluff that is the MSM, but in a format that the users won't suspect of being just as filtered.

        Luckily, *other* sites have gone open source with their algorithms, so if digg wants to keep up this charade in the interest of eventually selling their secrets to the top bidder, my advice to those bidders is "caveat emptor" because by then digg will probably be close to joining pets.com and stage6 on the wayback machine.

        Digg staff reading this, look at your user base: we all love linux (even if we don't use it), we browse digg using firefox, we digg up stories about hacking something for $10 that'd normally cost $200. We are an open source community by our very nature, and the open source/democratic promise of digg is what brought us here.

        To continue to tell us "pay no attention to the algorithm behind the curtain" when it torments us time and time again like this is a joke. Do you think we're that damn stupid? If we were, we'd be surfing Fox or CNN right now.

        You need to come out and say it once and for all: "We just want to give diggers the ILLUSION of democratic news". Be honest with us so we can move on to a real user-driven news site, or cut the crap and give us ALL the information on who dugg AND who buried every story so we can decide for ourselves whether the problem is a handful of diggers conspiring to bury certain news or if a truly random sampling just happens to really love being wiretapped.

        Keep your algorithm if you must have your Precious, but at least give your users the info we need to weed out the thought police if you truly care about being a user-driven "democratic" news site.
    • camehoe, on 07/09/2008, -7/+2Kevin, have my babies
    • judicar, on 07/10/2008, -1/+7How social media sites work: People
      Why social media sites don't work: People
    • aflaks, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3I dunno, that was a pretty easy answer "oh yeah the algorithm doesnt work perfectly"
      Digg me down, but i'm not convinced that suddenly, on the most important thread of the year (maybe), the algorithm messes up.
    • BestJaxx, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1Fina-*****-ly, now people will stop the panic. Thanks for clearing all of that up Kevin, I never doubted Democracy, I trusted there was a reasonable answer, but I thought it was something like a bug.
    • sup4141, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1Has Kevin ever been buried?
    • Quicksilver4648, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3Hehe, I made the 666th. digg.
    • buka039, on 07/10/2008, -0/+2So, basically what you, Kevin, saying is that there are some factors and numbers that affect apearing story on home page, and which we cant see? Thats lame.

      Show them to us, and there will no questions. Simple as that.
  • riseabove, on 07/09/2008, -19/+19WAAAAHHHHHH
  • plorie, on 07/09/2008, -11/+4digg has been editorial based for a long time - didn't people notice that before???
  • Amadeus2490, on 07/09/2008, -3/+41Digg is The Broken?! Where's Ramzi?

    /hacker biotches
    • ninxmz, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4Ramzi is the *****.. biotches.
    • 507projex, on 07/09/2008, -1/+1I prefer to spell it, "Beotch," but it might be a regional thing.
    • shck, on 07/10/2008, -0/+0I haven't been using digg for too long (Not sure why) but have been watching broken since first episode. I do agree though, digg could use some Ramzi!
  • thailand1972, on 07/09/2008, -3/+27I couldn't give a *****. If you don't like that they are changing the constitution, actually do something about it instead of bitching about it on Digg as if that's going to change something.
    • rex84, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1The thing is, they're not changing the constitution; they're ignoring it.
    • MtheoryX, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5Not to nitpick, but bitching about it on Digg is doing something. It may not be the right thing, or the most effective thing, but it most certainly is SOMETHING.
  • TwistyMcFister, on 07/09/2008, -12/+10ZOMG INTERTUBES!!!!!!!
  • MrRoboto, on 07/09/2008, -8/+17Digg is becoming a list of lists.
  • D14BL0, on 07/09/2008, -7/+68Digg isn't broken. Your SERVER is broken.
  • rodneygiles, on 07/09/2008, -1/+14Actually sir, it looks like your site broken as your page is not loading...
  • Egress99, on 07/09/2008, -14/+8...this guy is really complaining about a web site?

    You need to get out more dude...there's a world of pussy (or dick, your choice) waiting outside that door of yours, and it does a good job of distracting you from submitting stories like these.
    • d3dm, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3YOU are the pussy! LIGHTNING BOLT! LIGHTNING BOLT! DEATH!

      en garde! DOUCHÉ!

  • SigmaEcho, on 07/09/2008, -8/+33YTMND found the solution to this problem years ago: Have every story appear on the front page in a "Recently Created" category. Even if just for a few seconds. It creates a level playing field, and even a nobody will get their story dugg if it's worthy.

    Digg shot itself in the foot when they started adding social networking features years ago. Those features are diametrically opposed.to the idea of a story getting dugg on merit. Choose one or the other, digg. You can't have it both ways.
    • Defuser, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5You sir, are correct. Digg became all about whichever tubby loser could convince enough other tubby losers to join their "friends" list (and oh, the irony of that particular name). Stories make the front page now days based on who can most successfully Game the system.
  • davesousa, on 07/09/2008, -5/+10wow the digg effect seems to be really in full force on this one 398 diggs of of right now and the links already broken wow.... people need to stop posting links to busted ass old sites that cant handle 398 hits in a few hours...
    • ethon, on 07/10/2008, -0/+3I know its been said a million times, but... diggs != hits.
  • Blitzenn, on 07/09/2008, -14/+19Interesting complaint as the story actually DID make it to the front page. LAME!!!!
  • LeviTheSmith, on 07/09/2008, -3/+16It probably got about the same amount of burys as it did diggs. So it wouldn't goto the front page as easily.
    • gigibachorski, on 07/10/2008, -0/+2^ If this story got as many burys as it did diggs, then America is up ***** creek without a paddle
  • bobara, on 07/09/2008, -2/+105open letter to the seminal:

    your website is broken
    • Goombellaofgoom, on 07/09/2008, -6/+4It just got two major front-page stories nearly simultaneously. I'd think this would kill most servers.
  • ileftfark, on 07/09/2008, -9/+2DIGG IT PASS IT
    • jamez, on 07/09/2008, -4/+18Buy it, use it, break it, fix it,
      Trash it, change it, melt - upgrade it,
      Charge it, Pawn it, zoom it, press it,
      Snap it, work it, quick - erase it,
      Write it, get it, paste it, save it,
      Load it, check it, quick - rewrite it,
      Plug it, play it, burn it, drip it,
      Drag it, drop it, zip - unzip it,
      Lock it, fill it, curl it, find it,
      View it, colour, jam - unlock it,
      Surf it, scroll it, pose it, click it,
      Cross it, crack it, Switch- update it,
      Name it, rate it, tune it, print it,
      Scan it, send it, fax - rename it
      Touch it, bring it, Bey it, watch it,
      Turn it, leave it, stop - format it.
      Buy it, use it, break it, fix it,
      Trash it, change it, Melt - upgrade it,
      Charge it, Pawn it, zoom it, press it,
      Snap it, work it, quick - erase it,
      Write it, get it, paste it, save it,
      Load it, check it, quick - rewrite it,
      Plug it, play it, burn it, rip it,
      Drag and drop it, zip - unzip it
      Touch it, bring it, Bey it, watch it,
      Turn it, leave it, stop - format it.
      DIGG IT
  • darkbob87, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7Kevin needs to restart the Screen Savers show.
    • SolidSamus, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2I believe it is called Tekzilla...

      revision3.com/tekzilla
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 207 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.