digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Digg Users Send Message To Elite Whiners

pipes.yahoo.com — Here's a Yahoo Pipe that filters all stories submitted by the crybabies who whined about the algorithm change, asking pretentious questions like: "What happens if the most powerful users in the community decide to leave? Will others join? Is Digg anything without us?" You may have decided to stay, but we don't need you here--this Pipe shows why.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • canewediggit, on 01/26/2008, -10/+416you, sir, have big brass colbertesque cajones. dugg.

    more seriously- it looks exactly like digg on any other day. minus the current scientology throw-down which would be there anyways and is a temporary aberration.
    • slamtv7, on 01/26/2008, -2/+32Can someone link to posts / text /etc where they were complaining? I would like to read it thanks :)

      /Sorry for comment jacking
      • fkr3, on 01/26/2008, -3/+111http://muhammadsaleem.com/
        http://thedrilldown.com/

        They built revenue streams around their digg popularity then cried when digg reminded them that they're just as irrelevant as any of us individually compared to all the other users.
        • bukiyou, on 01/27/2008, -0/+69"frustrated by what we saw as a move to suppress the top contributors to the site and penalize them for their popularity..."

          wow. I did not know it was possible for anyone to say that and really mean it.

          thank you for the links.
        • cinnix, on 01/27/2008, -3/+15That interview on thedrilldown.com is brilliant. If I was Jay Adelson I wouldn't of given them the time of day, but good on him. What a bunch of moaning bitches.
        • alk509, on 01/27/2008, -5/+9"Wouldn't *have* given them..."
          Sorry, it's just the old obsessive-compulsive grammar crackdown syndrome acting up.
        • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -1/+5So, basically, a couple of advertising agencies are whining because they will actually have to start working for a living again.
        • zaibatsu, on 01/28/2008, -8/+2This is kinda sad, I don't make any money from TTD

          Oh well, it hard to fight ignorance. Oh well flame on, the least you guys could do is listen to our conversation with Kevin and Jay on TTD 25B.

          Wait I take that back, we got our 1st sponsor 2 weeks back. docstoc.com is paying us $250/month. All the money goes to Mrbabyman who edit all of our podcasts in his spare time when he's not doing the same thing for Disney.
      • j4200, on 01/27/2008, -2/+42Wow it is really amazing how poorly written those blogs are.
        "we immediately created a google group [...] and try to come up with possible solutions to the problem.being a bit of a fire-starter myself, i proposed that we immediately rally the troops and boycott digg until our demands (at that point undetermined) were met and our concerns (at that point a work in progress) resolved. at the end, however, andy’s diplomatic nature and good judgment prevailed - at least for a few hours."
        He write english good.
        • bianconeri4ever, on 01/27/2008, -1/+7It's done on purpose...part of his "branding"...**rollseyes**
        • DocHoliday22, on 01/27/2008, -0/+9I didn't know about them but now I do, I still don't care.
      • theodenking, on 01/27/2008, -13/+3Minus capitalisation, I can't see any flaws.
      • thatsmyaibo, on 01/27/2008, -4/+13Hate to promote my submission but I think every digg user should read this. This is from msaleem's blog. Him and the other 'elite' are pompous asses and this is proof. I am convinced they are making money otherwise it wouldn't be such a big deal to them. They literally think this site would be nothing without their submission.

        http://www.digg.com/people/Top_Digg_Users_Complain ...

        Sorry again for the link but people need to know. Personally I am tired of front page stories getting there because of who submits them and not actual content. I don't get why there are so upset anyway, they are submitting OTHER people's content!
        • Waterrat, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3 i feel the same way.
          I come here for the content and I stay for the Digger comments...Which are often more insightful than the content.
      • Tilon, on 01/27/2008, -11/+6"I am convinced they are making money otherwise it wouldn't be such a big deal to them."

        People only get worked up over money these days? No wonder we're doomed.
      • Timan, on 01/27/2008, -3/+1I've never heard so many people stutter like that before. That podcast was a p-p-p-p-p-p-p-ain to listen to.
    • Pake, on 01/26/2008, -10/+32Scientology is the new Ron Paul and iPhone of Digg it seems, but at least it's a change.
    • 07sheikh, on 01/26/2008, -15/+6Scientology Is FAKE!
      • HonoredMule, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3Good eye there.
      • Sophistifunk, on 01/27/2008, -0/+17Yeah the shadows are *al* wrong. Definitely photoshopped.
    • Poochyfud, on 01/27/2008, -8/+51I can't tell you how sick I am of the scientology links. At some point yesterday the TOP 8 in the recent section were all about it.
    • synthox, on 01/27/2008, -7/+112Remove mrbabyman, msaleem, digidave, and zaibatsu from your friends list if you have them friended. If you see stories submitted by them do not digg them. Turn the "revolt" to a active boycott of these users.
      • omarqaz7, on 01/27/2008, -1/+12Well, if you unfriend them, it becomes easier for their stories to reach the front page. In fact thats what they're mad about.
      • KiwiMark, on 01/27/2008, -2/+17Yep - look at any of their diggs, they sometimes do 20 in a minute - How the hell can you digg something you have only glanced at. Some serious back scratching going on.
        • borninda818, on 01/27/2008, -4/+7Have you never sent a story to a friend for a digg? They do the same but on a larger scale.
          • ShugNinx21, on 01/27/2008, -0/+7Except that their "friends" are not all really friends, but a bunch of users who mindlessly Digg anything they post. I guess it makes them feel all special that they are a "friend" to a top digger or something.
        • KiwiMark, on 01/27/2008, -1/+16No I haven't . But the point is, people should digg what they like and what they actually looked at - NOT what there mate just sends them.
        • bliz, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1I think it's difficult to enforce what people should digg.
          I feel it's reasonable for people to digg an article they like, digg an article they like and want a pointer for future reference, digg an article to read later. If only there's a way to detect the purpose of each digg. Perhaps digg.com could make use of some script to check if an article was accessed or not.
          It is not reasonable to digg purely for the sake of bringing your friend's submissions up.. or perhaps I just don't have any friends.. :(
          • MtheoryX, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1Personally, I like using it to bookmark stories, potentially stories I haven't even read yet. God knows you won't be able to use Digg's search to find it again.
      • DigiDave, on 01/28/2008, -3/+2You obviously don't know me or have ever looked at my submissions.
        I make no money off digg.
        I submit 2-3 a day -- only good material.
        I have been more critical of Digg IM-rings than anybody else http://www.digidave.org/adventures_in_freelancing/ ...

        Obviously I only want is best for the site/community.
        That inlcudes making Digg a more transparent place - which is not. That's what we were complaining about.
        • DUSTOFF101, on 01/29/2008, -1/+1No one likes you... go away loser and get a life you little bitch
    • Magnut, on 01/27/2008, -52/+3Christ digg users are so whiny, if they left there would be significantly less homepage content, reguardless of what your pipe says
      Watch them leave and go to reddit and see what happens
      And tbh, digg was not built entirely by kevin rose, these users have helped through the years to build this site up
      • DaffyDuck, on 01/27/2008, -1/+62Dude, there are probably at least 5 copies of every story posted. Theirs just happen to be the ones that make it to the front because they have their buddies digg them. If they leave, others will just fill in the space.
        • MacEnvy, on 01/27/2008, -0/+10They're like the lobbyists to our communal digg congress.
      • hipnerd, on 01/27/2008, -2/+32If they leave, the content changes minimally. Evey story has a dozen dupes. If Saleems disappeared, we'd all just digg the next guys. The system is supposed to be democratic. Superusers who push stories via friends networks disrupt the process, not enhance it.
      • Dweller99, on 01/27/2008, -1/+15"if they left there would be significantly less homepage content"
        Like when the top contributors were hired to submit to Netscape.

        Oh, wait. when they left NOTHING CHANGED. When these guys leave, NOTHING WILL CHANGE. Have you looked at the upcoming submission slist lately? There is no shortage of GOOD content. I will get by just fine without pictures of kittens.
      • Sleepytime, on 01/27/2008, -1/+13The site would be better off without the set of users complaining, they really should just up and leave, because they truly do not matter.
    • ruddy, on 01/27/2008, -0/+53the system was so ***** up, the first day the algorithm changed, all the front page articles were "we want the old algorithm". it was so warped, i though ALL of digg wanted it back. it goes to show how much power these "power users" really had. I agree with the comment above that many of them were contributing users to digg, but that doesn't mean they should have the right to the front page 24-7
    • theblt, on 01/27/2008, -2/+12Please digg this up so the whiners have something they can shove straight up their ass.
      http://digg.com/odd_stuff/AUDIO_Jay_Adelson_Kevin_ ...
    • mattcoady, on 01/27/2008, -1/+31Let them bitch and moan all they want. I'd love to see them just get up and go. I'm starting to think of this less of a socially driven news sites and more of the private blog of mrbabyman, msaleem, digidave, and zaibatsu. Who knows, maybe one of us could actually get to the front page now. In the long run, it's better to please the millions of users if it means upsetting four. If they've got a little sand in their vagina's about this whole change, go to AOL. Digg will be back in the hands of the masses again.
      • DigiDave, on 01/28/2008, -3/+1I have about 1 front page story a week -- I hardly claim ownership over digg.

        The complaint wasn't about getting us more homepage stories - it was about making digg a more transparent space.
    • theright, on 01/27/2008, -10/+54***** MRBABYMAN, MSALEEM AND ZAIBATSU!
      • bot001220, on 01/27/2008, -18/+6Let's not go that far, bubby.
      • OBKenobi, on 01/27/2008, -2/+11Anyone submitting dozens of stories on a daily basis for YEARS without being paid to do so shouldn't just be banned, they should be sent for psychiatric treatment.
        • Niightwitch, on 01/27/2008, -1/+3Of course they're getting compensated in some way, that's why they're getting so upset....their revenue stream is being interrupted. I'd like to see Digg freed from the tyranny of these top submitters who keep other people from getting to the front page just so they can profit financially.
      • Ataxia2008, on 01/27/2008, -0/+2w/out being paid. lol, yeah right.
    • ReyX, on 01/27/2008, -2/+1cajones = drawers
    • Pritchard, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3Not to mention that we can consider a large number of those to be duplicates - In the end, usually only one will get popular.
    • thcobbs, on 01/27/2008, -2/+17Is it just me, or did the site get better for the 12 hours they were boycotting it?
    • rpgmaker, on 01/27/2008, -2/+14Their plot backfired on them now the entire community hates them. Leave the site, we don't care we ALL know you game the ***** system, the new algorithm is the way to go.
      PS: Jay and Kevin were little bitches for even listening to this guys.
      • Waterrat, on 01/27/2008, -0/+2 If they are so unhappy,they are free to make a Digg clone and run it their way...
        • thcobbs, on 01/28/2008, -0/+2but then they'd actually have to create something....
    • chillypacman, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1could anyone please post a link detailing where and how all this started? I'm sorry I'm copletely out of the loop and the whole algorithm change thing.
    • smellinator, on 01/27/2008, -2/+2Awesome use of Pipes. But it should be called "Digg minus whiners minus ads". Great mash up; I'm going to read Digg that way from now on - Digg's making too much money off my eyeballs.

      [/sarcasm]
  • fkr3, on 01/26/2008, -21/+317OMG IT'S TOTALLY RUINED BRING THEM BACK!!!!!!!!!!
    • Konstantino, on 01/26/2008, -125/+7Quit being mean :(
      No seriously, there's no one that loves digg more than these guys. They weren't whining, they were trying to keep digg as a fun place to be. It's not fun for anyone when their stories don't get to the home page (and deserve to) -- even top guys.
      • masterc, on 01/27/2008, -4/+101The only reason why they love Digg is because it helps fill their pockets with money.
      • DarkDx, on 01/27/2008, -7/+70Ok. Now get out that dick from your mouth.
        • ruddy, on 01/27/2008, -2/+9i think it got stuck in this throat, let's give him a hand
        • bot001220, on 01/27/2008, -2/+7"give him a hand"? I'm not touching that thing!
      • hierophantus, on 01/27/2008, -1/+38Isn't it amazing that their stories ALWAYS get to the front page? I'm in awe that they're able to pick out exactly those articles that everyone is interested in, and with no help whatsoever, but solely on the merits of their awesome story-picking skill, watch their offerings rise to the top in a pure meritocracy. So beautiful, it brings a tear to my eye.
        • DaffyDuck, on 01/27/2008, -2/+7Were you being sarcastic?

          (Just kidding)
        • iamlXl, on 01/27/2008, -1/+10Seriously, thank you for bringing that up. I've seen time and time again where a top user submits a story hours after the same story is submitted by other users and doesn't hit the front page. I can't help but speculate that half of their articles are just stolen from other digg users.
        • qwertydvorak, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3that is just because guys like Konstantino ride their jocks. look at hs number of diggs over 10k diggs, and Zaibatsu is right at the top of his friend list.
      • domataos, on 01/27/2008, -15/+6The first 10 stories from last night are still in the first 20 today. I'm not a fanboy and could care less who puts stories on the front page, but the surprising lack of stories being moved today shows how much these guys did to get some stories dugg up.
      • Varz, on 01/27/2008, -1/+10They will get to the front page if they deserve to be on the front page.
        • DarknessGP, on 01/27/2008, -0/+5And that is why the algorithm got changed. Because stories were coming up that obviously didn't deserve to, i.e. 1 large group of friends digging the same story.
      • s0u1man, on 01/27/2008, -0/+4Please. They have the same chance to get their story to the front page as you do. They aren't being biased against, it just takes more than their 40 friends to get their submissions to the front page now, as it always should have been.
      • idslite, on 01/27/2008, -0/+6If they were trying to keep digg a "fun" place to be. Why the ***** were they bitching? The last time I checked, a bunch of bitching babies aren't fun to be with...
        • DigiDave, on 01/28/2008, -2/+1perhaps you should have looked as to what the complaints were? It wasn't about the algorithem - that was a tipping point: The impetus was the lack of transparency on Digg.
      • smacksaw, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3Yeah, by that logic, no one cares more about the children than people who post assloads of CP on imageboards.
      • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1If a person has 10 friends, and they submit a story to digg, and all 10 friends think it's worthy of diggage, should that person's story no be, at least, promoted to the top of 'upcoming'?

        Similarly, if a person has 100 friends, and only 10 think it's worth digging, should they get that same right?
    • Frost9999, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3If the 'elite' (leet? please hack the gibson while you're at it.) players of the digg game boycott, that would be meaningless. If the users, the viewers, and everyone else that visits decides to boycott - then digg is *****.
    • DigiDave, on 01/28/2008, -1/+3Okay -- I'll speak up. Did anybody look at what we were complaining about? I don't care about the algorithem change. I care about the rumors of secret editors, banned users and auto-burry lists.

      If Del.icio.us started banning users without explantion - people would be up in arms. Interpret how you want - but we only had the best intentions for the community - to ensure that Digg remains open and honest with everyone.
  • ssn697, on 01/26/2008, -7/+582I have paid nearly zero attention to this whole whiner brigade crap, but this is pretty funny *****. Dugg for sheer ***** you power...
    • Rapter09, on 01/27/2008, -2/+17Dugg for Truth
      • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1For great justice, click on every Digg!
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 01/27/2008, -1/+27I, personally, prayed for them to go away. PLEEEAASE don't cater to them. That means I get at least .0001% popularity rate. Jesus. These people are like fat, tyrannical kings who are protected only by the thin Digg Democracy and power cravers who follow and digg the top diggers only because they are popular.

      Screw you crybabies!
      • borninda818, on 01/27/2008, -21/+3you guys are the ones being crybabies right now. They are on top because they consistently submit quality content and have a large group of fans. They haven't done anything wrong and aren't whining. Seriously listen to the most recent podcast where they have a chat with Kevin and Jay and stop complaining.
        • sl9sl9, on 01/27/2008, -0/+7From your digg user page:

          "Hello Hello I'm David. I like to make friends and meet new people so if you want to chat IM me, if not just add me and I'll digg your stuff."

          "just add me and I'll digg your stuff." - this is the kind of activity that the OP and most of the contributers in this story are pissed about.
          • borninda818, on 01/27/2008, -5/+1why is that bad?
          • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+5It's a circumvention of the blind democracy that Digg is supposed to have, where individual stories are rated on merit, rather than on connection.
      • argusbargus, on 01/27/2008, -4/+2Do you realize that you have just fed the trolls? Specifically the worst breed: the bury brigade.
  • Hortnon, on 01/26/2008, -9/+350It's funny that these users think new people won't take their spots if they leave. Or that the effect will last more than a few hours.

    They need to grow up and get over themselves.
    • chaosium, on 01/26/2008, -21/+64A site with a million or so users is WORTHLESS without the five thousand most shrill and intolerable ones missing.

      WORTHLESS!

      Go to Reddit, conspiracists, paultards, schizophrenics, scientologists, anti-vaccination/fluoridation (already covered in the schizoid section, but worth repeating) idiots, you're not welcome here.
    • ChileanGoD, on 01/27/2008, -4/+7..and get a real job.
    • Cerberus047, on 01/27/2008, -0/+7well all you digg veterans know that this is just old history really... remember when people revolted since the like 80 percent of all stories were from diggs top 10.. (then they advertisied it) and we had people like albert pachino, and dirty fratboy, (didnt he go to netscape to get paid diggs?) and the site still survived.... so honestly, we have had major diggers come and go, the site will stay the same.
      • Hortnon, on 01/27/2008, -0/+2And that's what's supposed to happen on a site like this. "Out with the old, in with the new", and no one will notice.
    • teradome, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1Yeah. And Rocketboom is totally going to suck without Amanda Congdon!
  • geoken, on 01/26/2008, -5/+369I'm pretty sure 98% of the stuff they submit and get to the front page either

    a) Gets submitted by other people but never makes it

    or

    b) Is about to get submitted by other people, but they choose not to because the dup detector shows them the exact same story

    Either way, the exact same stuff would end up being submitted and dugg.
    • bingobongony, on 01/26/2008, -8/+87Or c) is from sites that pay them to get their site on Digg, and is pure crap anyway, and therefore won't be missed.
    • vocalyouth, on 01/27/2008, -1/+32I have had more than one story that I have submitted first make it to the front page by a "Power User". It's frustrating. I mean, I don't care THAT much, it's just the point that I'm sure it's happened to a lot of us and maybe the new changes to the algorithm give people like me more of a chance to move up the ranks.
    • jcm267, on 01/27/2008, -6/+36I was working third shift during all that teacher porn stuff, and the teacher porn case was actually happening in my hometown so I submitted several stories about it. I would submit the local paper story at 5am when it was first published and it would get a small amount of diggs. A few hours later on someone would submit a blogspam version that linked to the article from my local paper and that would be a top story.

      The people who care more about being the one who submitted the frontpager than the actual news are not good for digg. Maybe they should limit how many stories each account can submit each day.
  • crushfan, on 01/26/2008, -10/+295Someone call the WHAAAAMBULANCEE!
  • digindrivefast, on 01/26/2008, -52/+1Hey? Kevin god? can I buy me a friend or two...
    sarc
    digg dig
  • Burento, on 01/26/2008, -113/+8Notice how you cant get this to the front page... hmmm.. wonder why?
    • pyro789x, on 01/26/2008, -5/+26Because I, along with many others, dugg it while it was in upcoming?
    • rhylan, on 01/26/2008, -2/+28Well its now one digg closer anyway
      unlike your comment...
    • ChiRolla, on 01/26/2008, -4/+47Oh hey, look at that! Front page!
    • iDgg, on 01/27/2008, -4/+14owned
    • dumpyhumpy, on 01/27/2008, -1/+2dont let the door hit you on the way out...
  • Oomsoup, on 01/26/2008, -2/+176I'm not exactly sure why anyone would care about being a "top submitter" on Digg anyway. What does it get you? Fame, money, friends, job experience...?
    Why is it even a big deal at all? I'm being serious if someone knows and wants to explain. Maybe I'm missing something.
    • rhylan, on 01/26/2008, -5/+101Its gets you laid my friend - honestly women just used to ignore me but now I tell them I'm a regular Digg user I just cant get them to leave me alone...
      • Brad324, on 01/27/2008, -2/+57I tell them "you know what? I once had a comment on digg that was +550." Then they lustfully lunge their breasts into my face. That's what charm does, my babies.
        • theodenking, on 01/27/2008, -2/+32Until I get out my +670 that is.
          • Devotia, on 01/27/2008, -0/+16Why you gotta cockblock the man?

            (I'm just sad that my 100 means I gotta settle for the strays you guys kick away)
          • bot001220, on 01/27/2008, -1/+29You guys are looking at it the wrong way... everyone knows chicks like "bad boys". I tell them I once had a comment dugg down to -1200 and the panties come flying off.
      • klick37, on 01/27/2008, -7/+1Hahahaha, irony.
    • bingobongony, on 01/26/2008, -8/+67For some, it IS a job. Not a good job, mind you, but it is their job. They stupidly chose to choose a career path that is 100% dependent on an outside thing (in this case Digg) to make money. That is why they were so upset last week. They are seeing their income dry up big time. And they have no idea what they are going to do for a living because they ***** up their resume and have no job skills.
      • cuevas4711, on 01/26/2008, -1/+32how do those top diggers make money anyways?
        • DarkDx, on 01/27/2008, -2/+42Ad revenue + they get paid for some sites to get their content to the front page.
      • salmonmoose, on 01/27/2008, -1/+17Working for somewhere that tries to get 'dugg' frequently, I can see value in 'buying' submissions. It's certainly worth money to have your story front-paged.
        • bingobongony, on 01/27/2008, -3/+3Well, it depends...It has been shown that it is worth it to get your story front paged if you have GOOD centent. The one day spike in traffic is not going to be profitable. You get a 1-2 day boost in ad revenue, but your click through rates plummet to almost nothing, which can hurt your future revenue once your blog goes back to normal traffic numbers.
          It is good if your site is interesting enough that at least some of the digger traffic comes back from time to time to check out your site. Otherwise, you have to keep paying for diggs, which offsets the extra ad money.
    • MrESaulved, on 01/26/2008, -1/+2It gets you "temporary and self-limiting disproportionate influence" as the results now indicate.

      Disproportionate, due to a large friend network and exploitative behavior yet temporary and self-limiting as in once that disproportionate power is noticed/used it is dissipated.
    • bethlagarrison, on 01/26/2008, -3/+19e-peen
      • Oomsoup, on 01/27/2008, -0/+4That's all I could think of but honestly, what do they care what a bunch of random people on the internet think? I mean, it's not even as logical as flexing your e-peen in World of Warcraft. At least there you are kind of friends with people, you talk to them on a personal level often. It's not even like that here at all, really.
        I'm just totally confused. : /
        Bingobongony said above that they DO get paid but I don't see how.
    • Drax0n, on 01/27/2008, -3/+6You think they arn't making money on the side for generating traffic to sites?
    • Avalanchee, on 01/27/2008, -1/+5You get to have your username read on Diggnation.
    • cphelps, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1It makes your balls huge.
    • Ataxia2008, on 01/27/2008, -0/+4Get a real job you ***** assholes.
    • Waterrat, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1 I've made the front page four times and have been here since 06.
      For me,making the front page is not that important..But I can see it would be to them since it's money in their pockets...
      They should have known they would get caught with their hands in the cookie jar...Oh well.
    • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1It gets you advertising dollars when your submissions get diggers onto a site that will pay you for a surge in traffic.
  • Daniel591992, on 01/26/2008, -4/+86They need to get a life:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_babyman/2119571733 ...
    • estvir, on 01/26/2008, -6/+40What a loser.
    • kutateli, on 01/27/2008, -8/+7"Haha, you should thank the mod who pushed 'promote'."
      -supernova17

      Wait.. what? Mods can send stuff straight to the homepage if they feel like it? What the *****, Digg?
      • estvir, on 01/27/2008, -1/+18Wait.. what? You randomly believe comments on Flickr? What the hell, kutateli?
        • kutateli, on 01/27/2008, -2/+1supernova17 is one of the "elite" users on Digg. Although I suppose it could be someone else posing as him so I guess your comment is justified.
        • ThreeDee912, on 01/27/2008, -1/+2He means that it was posted as sarcasm, or as a joke.
    • asurroca, on 01/27/2008, -1/+11A picture's worth a thousand words, but that one's only worth this many == "zomg my story got to digg's front page w 44 votes!!!!11" fap fap fap fap
  • CasaMan, on 01/26/2008, -36/+4I like the concept.. Would have dugg if the title/description were funnier (less childish)..
  • Sep11insidejob, on 01/26/2008, -55/+6digg censors and that is a fact!
    • bingobongony, on 01/26/2008, -17/+8You would be better off if your brain censored your ridiculous thoughts once in awhile. (And by the way, your own candidate Ron Paul thinks you are a ***** wacko. Just thought you should know that.)
      • Sep11insidejob, on 01/27/2008, -4/+4He's for a new (real) investigation and that is all I want.
        http://www.patriotsquestion911.com
        • bingobongony, on 01/28/2008, -0/+1How many investigations do you want? It only takes common sense to know what happened. You possess none of that. And again...Ron Paul thinks that people who think it was an inside obs are ***** lunatics. So he thinks you are a ***** lunatic.
  • Sun.Surfin, on 01/26/2008, -2/+243I honestly said to a friend the other day that I wish Digg had a filter so I could have a homepage without the 'elite' users for a few days. I didn't have a problem with them until I started to see what was really going on. I'm sick of seeing stories in the upcoming section and digging them, only to have MrBabyMan come along and resubmit with the exact same URL/ Title/ Description and quickly surpass them. It's absolutely ridiculous. What makes you think you're such an asset to Digg? Are you honestly so arrogant that you can't imagine Digg surviving without you?

    Ah, imagine a filter just for the elite, so we could all turn them off like many do with the Apple filter come keynote time...
    • sfacets, on 01/26/2008, -1/+36Hear hear!
    • hereisandy, on 01/27/2008, -0/+19actually, i looked in my setting to see if i could block their stories. we need to add this feature to digg.
      • unnes, on 01/27/2008, -2/+3Just bury the stories you see submitted by them... Never mind, that would require you to actually look at WHO submitted a story, which is totally irrelevant to the purpose of the site.
    • Schneckehaus, on 01/27/2008, -0/+8Really I wanna take it a step further and be able to filter out certain users and sites. Some sites and users just simply are not trustworthy.
      • Waterrat, on 01/27/2008, -0/+2 I like this idea...Although the block user feature works pretty well.
    • geffo, on 01/27/2008, -0/+2exactly right
  • TaintedTux, on 01/26/2008, -4/+20Hahaha. Dugg for humor and middle finger power.
    • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1I do appreciate me some middle finger power.
  • Lixie, on 01/26/2008, -2/+138A small elite group of diggers complained because the changes made it harder for a small elite group of diggers to get to the front page. Their self-interest is not in my interest so I decline support.
    • zephyr42, on 01/27/2008, -2/+12Their complaint hit the front page.... I still burried it because it was/is lame and childish.
  • serverdown, on 01/26/2008, -13/+5really it used to be maybe 10 users controlling the stories shown to a million
  • effinboy, on 01/26/2008, -1/+29This was the first I heard of this. Shows how much it really matters doesn't it?
  • honus, on 01/26/2008, -0/+30This is quite hilarious. Insult to injury.
  • akohut, on 01/26/2008, -13/+4Does it really matter?
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/27/2008, -1/+1Dear crybaby elite... Whaaaa!!!!
  • ZenMojo, on 01/26/2008, -0/+49I completely stopped sending stuff up because somebody else already had, and even when they hadn't, someone else got dugg up faster.
    Trust me, there's 300 people out there waiting to digg up the stuff they'll leave behind when they're gone.
  • jetboyterp, on 01/26/2008, -3/+28Awesome! They can go start their own site for all I care...
    • BTime, on 01/27/2008, -6/+3They already did, it's called SlashDot which is where most of the recent Digg headlines are coming from
  • estacado, on 01/26/2008, -3/+91Why did they cancel their decision to boycott digg?
    • otatop, on 01/26/2008, -7/+85Because Kevin and Jay were like "Pweeease don't leave" giving them exactly what they wanted.
      • amoirae, on 01/27/2008, -3/+43Yeah, a virtual handjob.
      • theblt, on 01/27/2008, -3/+30No, Kevin and Jay actually sat down and called into a podcast explaining the changes. The whiners just shamefully came back.
    • Varz, on 01/27/2008, -1/+22Because they can't exist without digg, not the other way around.
  • xpankrat, on 01/26/2008, -2/+42Actually, this is not a bad idea for a feature right here on digg itself -- to be able to automatically bury/hide stories if the submitter is on a "blacklist".

    I know I would use this and you can probably guess who'd take first few honorary spots on the list :)
    • decepticrat, on 01/27/2008, -7/+7It already is a feature. You can block any digger you choose to by clicking the 'circle w/ a line through it' that appears next to their name after you digg down one of their comments or stories.
      • xpankrat, on 01/27/2008, -1/+16This works for the comments only IIRC
    • Schneckehaus, on 01/27/2008, -0/+7Only works for comments. It would be nice if it detracted their Digg from my view, and also would be nice if I could block certain sites.
      • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1The problem comes when the server has to sort each and every story by relative digg weight to the viewing user. Consider that a story with 1000 canonical diggs would require 1000 user relationship lookups for your personal Digg sum.
        • bowe, on 01/28/2008, -0/+1He's not looking to block the people who have dugg the story, only the submitter
  • cadmiumpaint, on 01/26/2008, -3/+89anyone who really cares about being a "top digger" is basically a loser. Go outside of your house and make some real friends.
  • CheeseburgerBro, on 01/26/2008, -2/+112My submissions never become popular, despite the fact that they clearly rock. I DEMAND REGIME CHANGE!
    • diggymow, on 01/27/2008, -0/+5I am sorry I have ignored you CheeseburgerBro, I will take more notice.
  • aelias, on 01/26/2008, -3/+14Just because Digg as a community has a voice, don't deign to think yours is any more melodious to others.
  • neom, on 01/26/2008, -13/+14I don't get it... :(
    • Carret, on 01/27/2008, -2/+7I don't know why you are being dugg down just because you don't know what's going on. After the Digg algorithm change that took place, these "Elite" diggers (specifically the ones named at the top of the page) complained about it and what it would do to their Diggs/submissions (pretty much they would lose a lot of power they had over Digg's top stories). They were preparing to boycott Digg, wondering aloud how Digg would continue on without their vital submissions. This is just a pipe that displays all of the current submissions on Digg, minus the ones made by the "elite" diggers mentioned above. That's all, nothing too fancy, although I may have oversimplified the story. I will digg you up.
    • rumagin, on 01/27/2008, -3/+3me too
  • webaddict, on 01/26/2008, -5/+11Check out a chat room transcript of the PRE Digg Revolt with Kevin Rose and Jay Adelson here:
    http://digg.com/tech_news/Digg_PRE_revolt_chat_roo ...
  • Malarie, on 01/26/2008, -2/+135Wow... Super star diggers? lol nothing can surprise me anymore. This is so fuking ridiculous. Nobody cares if you are a super-mega-popular digger. Really. no one gives a *****.
    • hyAxis, on 01/27/2008, -2/+1...specially if they're not.
    • Varz, on 01/27/2008, -0/+5Exactly, digg is about the articles not about the article posters.
    • cphelps, on 01/27/2008, -0/+4Actually, I was walking down the street the other day and got 7 handjobs because I had a T-Shirt on proclaiming my digg supremacy.
      • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1Masturbating in public does not constitute a 'hand job'.
    • Fordi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1Just goes to show. You can be king of the hill all you want; the hill can still throw you off.
  • Skooma714, on 01/26/2008, -3/+6What the hell is going on?
  • schavira, on 01/26/2008, -5/+11Go get them digg users! It's not like any of you are elite whiners!
  • mogebier, on 01/26/2008, -1/+30It's a lot nicer not to have the front page full of scientology and apple stories.
    • Schneckehaus, on 01/27/2008, -0/+5Oh man am I tired of seeing ***** about Leopard and KDE and Scientology, I wish I coulds filter those subjects out.
  • DivisibleByZero, on 01/26/2008, -1/+5It would be cool if Digg would allow users to set a yahoo pipe or other rss feed for their front page display. Then we could use this with the same UI, like nothing happened!
  • se1zure, on 01/26/2008, -5/+7they forgot phizzer or whatever his name is.
    • EditorResponse, on 01/27/2008, -3/+2pizzler, not that I have anything against him/her.
  • se1zure, on 01/26/2008, -5/+7sorry, i meant pizzler
  • oneiroi, on 01/26/2008, -4/+5I think this is a bad change. Friends should be able to dig other people's stories without it "hurting" it's ranking.

    On the other hand, I don't care about the "elite" diggers.
    • Schneckehaus, on 01/27/2008, -0/+7Small dedicated swarms shouldn't have as much power as random people. Diversity of diggers algorithm makes sure that the news appeals to a larger group of people, instead of a flood of niches stories with a small super dedicated user-base.
      • xpankrat, on 01/27/2008, -1/+2> Small dedicated swarms shouldn't have as much power as random people.

        In fact, swarms or clusters of friends should really count as a single entity as far as voting for the story in concerned.
  • Tyr7BE, on 01/26/2008, -3/+15Why "Elite"? Doesn't elite imply that they're good at something, and that they're top of the class in what they do, and that they look down on others? I think it's sort of hard to be "elite" on a site like Digg. Just try to sound elite when you're bitching and complaining about what gets ranked higher - a lolcat picture, or a guy getting hit in the nuts. Go on, try it out.
    • manitoba98xp, on 01/27/2008, -0/+7I think the poster meant "Elitist".
    • thailand1972, on 01/27/2008, -0/+9I'd call them what they are: spammers.
  • onetimer, on 01/27/2008, -4/+83Seriously, if you want to see the extent of the self-righteous elitist attitude, just take a look at mrsaleem's blog. These pricks think that digg wouldn't be able to work without them.

    Yes, i'm SURE digg would collapse if you and your circle-jerk buddies weren't here to submit content that has already been submitted by someone else anyways...

    Seriously, I can't believe Kevin and Jay actually took time to coddle them during their bitch-fest-boycott. If I were them, I wouldn't treat them any different than any other user. These assholes don't deserve the time of day from digg managment...
    • steamerpunk, on 01/27/2008, -1/+19True dat.
    • mattgilberg, on 01/27/2008, -0/+3Amen to that. We all know that a story is going to be submitted anyways, regardless of the submitter, so if there are dupes, ignore the elite's story and digg someone else's.
  • Shaman760, on 01/27/2008, -2/+19Looks like normal everyday Digg to me....
  • cl0n3x, on 01/27/2008, -3/+31I seriously wish I could digg this twice.
  • fhornplayer, on 01/27/2008, -9/+8I need to et my eyes checked. I misread that as "Digg users send message to Eli Whitney"
    • Meowbiusfox, on 01/27/2008, -2/+2What message would they send? stop ginning cotton?
  • hollowex, on 01/27/2008, -34/+4You guys are morons. All they really want is some transparency. They are sticking up for you guys as well.
  • fLUx1337, on 01/27/2008, -3/+25I'm glad we have gotten rid of the "top users" now totally, it makes Digg feel like a full comunity, not 10 top users stories plus whatever is left from others...

    I mean no disrespect to any of the top users, they often submitted good stuff, BUT - the whole point of Digg is that we DON'T need people like that....
    • unnes, on 01/27/2008, -0/+11They also often submitted total crap, that was dugg up because they had 2943478534 friends who wanted diggs back.
  • StanStutter, on 01/27/2008, -2/+44Elite? I've never referred to them as that. I've always called them link dumpers. They post links from their rss feeds. I don't think they even read them. What's so elite about that?
    • bjtitus, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1They think they're the only ones who know of this new technology called "syndication" and we're all supposed to be afraid of it. I say BURN the witches!
  • noseeme, on 01/27/2008, -1/+28Zaibatsu seemed to be the biggest douche in this respect, filtering him should be fun!!!
    • OBKenobi, on 01/27/2008, -0/+5I'm just amazed they're still here, spamming away without getting anything for it. Maybe they think they have fans.
      • StanStutter, on 01/27/2008, -1/+4Human nature. People will strive for social acceptance and status, even if their society is artificial or imaginary.
        Productivity is measured by collecting links, they are paid with diggs. Neither has any value in the real world, but the illusion creates the same sense of satisfaction. This is the down side to being a cognitive creature. We can suspend reasoning in exchange for satisfaction.
        Wow. I really pulled the curtain back a little too far this time. Sorry.
        • noseeme, on 02/08/2008, -0/+1"Wow. I really pulled the curtain back a little too far this time. Sorry."
          Haha. Something we should be knowing here? ;)
  • mghwom1, on 01/27/2008, -43/+3I'm a fan of all of these guys. They've provided the site with some great content, and have always been open to listening to other members of Digg.
    To start a revolt against the revolters is silly, IMO. They have their opinions for a reason - they want to maintain the empire that is Digg. If Digg starts heading in a path similar to other social voting sites (i.e. Propeller), they'll find themselves overrun with spam.
  • mal1964, on 01/27/2008, -6/+2Pipped!
  • gab00n, on 01/27/2008, -11/+2You will respect my authority!
  • ffttoteof, on 01/27/2008, -2/+5Wow, just tried out Yahoo pipes after seeing this. Finally now I have an RSS feed for Boing Boing that filters out anything with "steampunk" in the description.
    • unnes, on 01/27/2008, -0/+2Corey Doctorow must have been a watchmaker in a previous life.
    • leemarvin, on 01/27/2008, -0/+1Thanks. That was beautiful. dugg
  • charlie55, on 01/27/2008, -3/+38this is embarrassing. people actually care about whether their stories are promoted? why?

    top users think they are valuable to the community? why? digg is about stories, based on merit, never people.

    man, the reasons people will give for why they matter can be absurd sometimes.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 104 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.