Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
How To Get More Diggs
blogavenues.blogspot.com — The neverending battle continues. Here's someone with some good insight speaking on the subject.
jboitnott- 134 diggs
- digg it
- colsonalex, on 06/13/2008, -4/+1Very nice article, surely worth the time it takes to read it !
- lazycat, on 06/13/2008, -0/+7"Google discounts the bookmark for the most part, if you do not get a high number of votes (at Digg it would be at least 30 to 50 Diggs). At some point Google is going to start seeing this as a negative indicator."
Well, the message is clear: do not spam Digg and other social networks with crap. Submit quality material and you will get noticed both by people and by Google robots. - warchildbosnia, on 06/13/2008, -5/+2Dugg! I hope I can use this to get more Diggs on my best article:
http://digg.com/educational/The_Unicru_Application - nihility, on 06/13/2008, -0/+2Sure, creating backlinks with sites like digg might not work, but what about people who don't really care about their PageRank? Some people are just looking for more hits, and if you post decent content across many sites you might eventually build up a userbase. However, a lot of the spam that passes through HAS no content, and thus should fail in both respects. And in case nobody noticed, the guy who wrote this kinda crosses himself up in the fact that he DID post his blog on here in the way of the content: http://socialauthority.ning.com/forum/topic/show?i ...
- MarketingSocial, on 06/15/2008, -0/+0Get all the hits you want but does the traffic convert? Do you have anthing to convert to? I don't care about PageRanks either, I care about my Google rankings. PageRank has little to do with my rankings.
- fluidfoundation, on 06/13/2008, -0/+3Seems pretty easy, all you have to do is write an article on how to get more diggs or how to get on the front page, and you're gold.
- benologist, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1I really, really doubt Google has made any changes to their algorithm for social networking sites. Arguing that Google checks the votes your link received on a social networking site is just silly. I also refuse to believe without concrete evidence, that Google or any other search engine penalises a site just because it's content isn't popular on social networking sites. Social networking and web 2.0 is very much a niche (compared to the 100s of millions of people who don't care about it) and there are infinitely better criteria for rating pages than how they perform on digg, reddit, newsvine, stumbleupon etc.
What happens is if the story doesn't get popular it doesn't get much linkage within the site. Take digg for example, a story that doesn't get popular only has a handful of links to the discussion page, buried somewhere in user profile pages. That discussion page and thus your link on it is pretty much worthless. A story that does get popular however gets a pile of external sites linking to your page and digg's discussion page, making both the your page and the discussion page linking to your page (and thus your page again) more valuable.
I suspect the day will actually come when Google starts dampening or even disregarding links on social sites, not only because they're such huge magnets for spam but because by their nature they generate a disproportionate number of backlinks for the value they offer the search engine's users. - Snafu7, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1Step 1: Create good content
And that's it... - Vullkan, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1yea sure I submitted this yesterday http://digg.com/tech_news/Philips_introduces_the_1 ...
even though it's amazing I didn't get enough diggs to get into the top upcoming articles - uz2surf, on 06/14/2008, -0/+1This is good content. I have been a Digg member for almost 2 years and I am just finding out how to use it correctly. I thought it was a place to store my content at first and was ever so wrong. This is a quote from the blog that I thought was funny. The called Chris's page ugly so of course I wanted to see if I thought it was ugly, too.
Quote is here:
This post is indeed quite interesting. If think naturally when people start blogging, they are eager to be read, and a lot of people try to do exactly what you mentioned in your post (I did :P). I'll make a small post pointing to yours if you don't mind.
One thing maybe Chris, although your book seems great, the design of the page is real Ugly :P Make me think of though pages those spam pages that promise to make you rich while doing nothin...
End Quote.
Do people still buy things that promise to make you rich while you do nothing? - MarketingSocial, on 06/15/2008, -0/+0Benologist: I really, really doubt Google has made any changes to their algorithm for social networking sites.
You are right they have not made any changes, it was included in the algo in 2005 with the Google blogsearch addition. Blogs are judged on a different set of rules, or at least additions to the rules for the algo.
How Google Ranks Your Blog From the Google Patent:
"[0043] Tagging of the blog document may be a positive indication of the quality of the blog document. Some existing sites allow users to add “tags” to (i.e., to “categorize”) a blog document. These custom categorizations are an indicator that an individual has evaluated the content of the blog document and determined that one or more categories appropriately describe its content, and as such are a positive indicator of the quality of the blog document."
Pay attention to "tagging the document", this is very important. This is Google talking about social bookmarking sites. We add "tags" to our bookmarks to better descibe what a blog post is about. At Digg it is the keywords used in the link and the description.
Benologist: I also refuse to believe without concrete evidence, that Google or any other search engine penalises a site just because it's content isn't popular on social networking sites.
Google does not penalize it, however I believe when you submit your own content Google does, especially when you do it again and again. Google does see it as being more valuable when it does get more than 50+ diggs.
When someone submits the same domain over and over Google can see this in your profile and will penalize you for this.
Benologist: Arguing that Google checks the votes your link received on a social networking site is just silly.
Look your profile, there are all the links that you voted for, Google can see that because they are links, so Google can see what you voted for when Googlebot follows the links.
So Google can simply do this, Domain X Number of links in Digg = Digg Popularity.
Got any more ideas you think are silly? Proof, I have concrete proof, 3 months of testing on Digg. - thebrokenforum, on 07/04/2008, -0/+0Ok so I obviously have no clue what I'm doing. I'd like to think that I've submitted some quality stuff but my "diggs" are pathetic. I'm not sure if the tags I'm using are bad or the titles of the stories or even the categories I'm placing them in but progress has been slow.
- GuitArticles, on 07/14/2008, -0/+0I personally feel that there are much better ways of focusing your energy, aside from social bookmarking. For me, I have found that social bookmarking is degrading. I can get much better results without it, by using that time more effectively. I have also noticed that a lot of people who use social bookmarks to get their site or blog up and going, are not as capable of thinking outside of the box and are desperate. I am just learning this. I think that social bookmarking sites should stay as they were originally intended. I recently started reading steve pavlina's stuff, and he is a top blogger. Many know of him, but regardless, he did things in a more laid back manner, and simply just believed in himself. You have to follow before you can lead, but once you are capable of leading - you must do so. Some people never learn this. I think I just figured this out for myself
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by