digg

Join DiggAbout

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

See the original image at briancarpio.com

So Called Top Digg Users Cry About Digg Changes

briancarpio.com — For years there has been a small group of Digg users who think they control the digg community. Kevin Rose has posted a blog about the recent changes to the Digg.com algorithm that will change the future of Digg and the small community that controls it A few elitists think they control Digg and are very unhappy.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • koolman3, on 01/24/2008, -10/+400QQ, so what you can't continue to control digg, get over it.
    • largeora, on 01/24/2008, -9/+266Their are losing their income! this is a big business and these so called "top diggers" are nothing more or less then a bunch of marketers promoting the sites they get money from.
      • Bhima, on 01/24/2008, -4/+59well, that explains a lot.
        • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -19/+4Attention N00bs. Please look at the story you are commenting about. This is only half the story that this slack ass writer posted. If you guys had any ***** clue exactly what all went down last night you would bury this story as inaccurate! Guess what Kevin Rose was on the podcast the Top Diggers held and the algorithm is the only thing they were pissed about. It was about in-consistent banning and lack of Digg communication to it's user base. Did I mention Kevin Rose was on the podcast for you fanboys? So that would mean Kevin sees there IS a problem. Oh wait Kevin and Jay do not WANT the Top Diggers to leave. Holy *****! How about that! Jackasses!
          • Sidzilla, on 01/25/2008, -2/+8He is willing to compromise with them, try to settle the little bitches down, and that is fine. But bottom line they are a bunch of glory hounds who ruin things for most people on Digg. YES, they copy stories and post them as their own knowing the numerous blind Diggs they get will eclipse the original posters, and YES, they have corrupted the system to their own ends, and YES, they need to get the ***** out. When you have been on Digg for more than a few months, run your mouth. Till then, shut the ***** up.
          • SilentJay74, on 01/25/2008, -3/+2Sid you have submitted 6 things and made nothing popular. What have you contributed besides a hack ass comment?
          • Sidzilla, on 01/25/2008, -0/+2Time, comments, and I even purchase some of the items advertised on Digg. Besides calling people you disagree with n00bs and jackasses you also show an utter ignorance of what this site was designed to be and how it should work. It would be easy to subscribe to dozens of RSS feeds and blindly submit the stories, and then cultivate dozens of 'friends' to digg them up so that they get noticed, but that is counterproductive and hurts Digg overall. Look at the stories the people you are defending submitted today. The 10 best Dicks in history? What not to do with a baby? This is the kind of crap you get when you are more interested in getting anything to the front page regardless of quality. Look at the sheer quantity of what they submit. Do you honestly think they read these things before submitting them? Be honest.
            P.S. Though I disagree vehemently on this issue, let me say thank you for your service to our country. heroes like you are all to rare today.
      • KibibyteBrain, on 01/24/2008, -5/+75Yes, the famous "Top Digger" club. Kind of like the special olympics division of Yale's Skull and Bones.
      • Audacitor, on 01/24/2008, -20/+9Yep. msaleem, zaibatsu, supernova17, babyman, they're all bringing us this content for the monies.
        /sarc
        • DarkSamus, on 01/24/2008, -6/+28those *****!

          i don't know how much skills it takes to import ***** from reddit every hour, is it difficult?
          • sekhui, on 01/24/2008, -1/+28no harder than hijacking stories off of upcoming and spamming everyone's shoutbox with them.
          • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -9/+2WOW DARK SAMUS! You wanna run your mouth and you have submitted 13 stories. You're tough.
          • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -9/+1And Sekhui you have submitted nothing. What have you contributed to the community besides a smart ass comment?
          • solidus636, on 01/24/2008, -1/+3@Jay...
            and you've only had 2 of your 500 something stories made popular...
            stop submitting *****...
          • sekhui, on 01/25/2008, -0/+2jay, there's not much point if the top users are going to hijack stuff, and it's proven that they do. I have in fact tried submitting many stories but i'm probably a little too conscientious about submitting dupes... which is to say, i don't.
      • ayeroxor, on 01/24/2008, -15/+7Their are what?
      • tsbardella, on 01/24/2008, -3/+11I still really like Cracked.com...
        • calon9, on 01/24/2008, -1/+16I like Mangoes.

          Has nothing to do with your comment, but I'm just having a weird craving.
      • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -10/+2This coming from someone who has submitted nothing.
        • Ataxia2008, on 01/25/2008, -1/+0STFU already
        • Sidzilla, on 01/25/2008, -0/+8You seem to think that submitting countless stories counts for something. I submitted maybe four, none went to the top page. What I did submit I thought was interesting. If you equate volume with quality you need to grow up a little bit. If you disagree with someone don't insult them because they aren't like the little pussies who submit forty stories a day and spam the world getting them dugg up to the front page. That's the problem we are discussing and you seem to think it is a good thing. I would rather read one story a year submitted by each digger than a thousand by MrBabyman, Msaleem, and Digidave. They are the problem. They need to start doing things with honor instead of with venom. You remember honor, don't you?
        • SilentJay74, on 01/25/2008, -1/+1Oh I remember honor, don't talk to me about that! I was a Marine for nine years. The problem I am trying to shed light on in this article. If there is HONOR as you put it, then the writer of this cheap piece of ***** blog post would have covered the whole story. He didn't he wanted to focus on some *****. I mean seriously why don't you guys look at all the facts, like on Techipedia, News Week and other soources besides some idiot who only covered half of the story. This submission is *****! Plain and simple. You guys are blind morons for even believing it to.
    • sockpuppets, on 01/24/2008, -8/+30So... leave?
    • mrmacky, on 01/24/2008, -13/+18Less QQ more pew pew.... oh, this isn't counter-strike, nevermind.
      • choebear, on 01/24/2008, -15/+1Sorry, Digg has an autobot (...more than meets the eye?) that buries any comments including the words "counter-strike"
      • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -0/+4I wish Counter-Strike had laser guns.
    • QGYH2, on 01/24/2008, -5/+48Well they have fought back with this epic post which asks the question "Is digg anything without us"
      They intend to prove it too.
      http://thedrilldown.com/?p=58
      • oldhick, on 01/24/2008, -2/+73Thank god! I myself won't miss them one bit.
        • zaibatsu, on 01/24/2008, -19/+2Most old hicks wouldn't miss us
        • dshPls, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5They can take their ***** elsewhere, other submitters are just going to find the same stories and submit them, so who cares.
      • victorh86, on 01/24/2008, -3/+55point 3 is funny. "3) Lack of transparency – Digg only shows you the stories that people have dugg, but not the ones that are buried."

        You can't see them because their buried. *****. That's the sole purpose of that option.

        And another one, "Is Digg anything without us?" What kind of question is that? That's a big D-U-H. No users=no site:many users=site.

        Seriously people, like the man said, get over it
        • ayeroxor, on 01/24/2008, -19/+8THEY ARE = THEY'RE

          ffs.
          • ayeroxor, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1^You're getting buried because you're the only one that doesn't understand that that post was also mocking the stupid.
        • rebrad, on 01/24/2008, -0/+18I have to agree. My mornings perusal of Digg was like a breath of fresh air. I think I will come back to Digg more now.
      • ErrorS, on 01/24/2008, -1/+70Glad to see them go
      • mooninite, on 01/24/2008, -3/+37Hm, I have very few friends on my digg profile and I managed to easily get a story on the front page. You don't need to have 100+ friends (real life or not) to get a front page story.

        We don't need them no matter what they say.
        • bobcor1984, on 01/24/2008, -35/+1You only made one story popular dude.
        • SniperZero, on 01/24/2008, -0/+22Agreed. I have no friends and I got a video to hit frontpage :)
      • thcobbs, on 01/24/2008, -1/+85This is the most arrogant "charge" I've ever seen about dig:

        "5) Repeated and flagrant disrespect of its top users."

        That alone writes you off in my book.
        • m3mn0n, on 01/24/2008, -0/+48I couldn't help but laugh at the elitism and arrogance of the guy who wrote the "top digg users upset" story.

          Do they really think the content would not find its way to digg if they did not post it?

          They whore RSS feeds and other similar sites and submit everything they possibly can before we "commoners" can submit it after actually reading the article. And don't even get me started on the friend system manipulation so called "top diggers" do.
          • jambarama, on 01/24/2008, -0/+8I got here relatively early. When digg was new, I'd submit things I found interesting that others had posted, as well as some stuff I'd written on my own blog. I'd digg through upcoming stories, looking for something interesting to help promote. I never got anything to hit the front page, but I felt like I was adding to the dialog.

            Gradually I discovered that whenever I found a neat article & tried to submit it, it had already made all the slashdot/reddit/digg rounds. So I stopped submitting stuff, and let the "professional" diggers do it. I even stopped looking through the upcoming articles for the same reasons.

            So for as long as I can remember, I've just read the front page, occasionally digg what is already there, make a comment here or there, and digg other comments. If the "pro" diggers really leave, it'd be a shot in the arm for me to do more than just be a passive participant. Maybe that'll improve the content that hits the front page.
        • mlostracco, on 01/24/2008, -0/+43"Wahhh! Digg OWES ME for putting so many stories on the front page! I MAKE THEM WHAT THEY ARE! They should be THANKING us!"

          /delusion
      • BobOki, on 01/24/2008, -0/+15BWHAHAHAHA
        After reading that, I can sympathize with him on his losses, but damn. I would hate to see this guy find out how the electoral college works ;P
      • hectazee, on 01/24/2008, -0/+17is digg anything without us? *****' retards I find so many stories in stumble before I see them on digg. In fact, I would look at your article just to look at your names and NOT digg your stories for being arrogant SOB's, but I won't, cuz its DOWN
        lame
      • CoSMoSYS, on 01/24/2008, -0/+25Once (IF) they even do leave, there will be others to take their place and DIGG will continue to maintain.
      • Recluse, on 01/24/2008, -0/+21Yeah well good luck with that fellas, I certainly won't miss you and I doubt anyone else will.
      • funkytaco, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4Thanks, I posted on their blog and my comment is waiting moderation.
        • edwartica, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4Yeah, I posted a comment, but I doubt they'll approve it.
      • edwartica, on 01/24/2008, -0/+23Don't let the door hit you on the ass!
      • Mortikhi, on 01/24/2008, -0/+17They dugg their own grave
    • Mordanthanus, on 01/24/2008, -2/+51You mean, there is a digg algorithm? Most of us just wanna read the news...
    • AcePup, on 01/24/2008, -2/+26Being a top digger (Top 100) if you consider that a 'top digger' I have to say I like the changes. It's allowed me to step away from digg and only submit stories from certain websites now. In the past that was not the case and I would submit everything that was original from everywhere. I say good for you Kevin and the rest of the Digg crew.
    • deMonkey, on 01/24/2008, -0/+38Good! Digg is about democracy. It's about the people choosing the best stories, not a handful, but everyone.

      If being popular or having had submitted stories in the past gives you more power (or exponentially more power if you're a top digger) it's not a democracy. It's funny though that there are so many blogs out there complaining about the changes as if they're unfair, but by taking power away from *specific* diggers, they're bringing this site back the roots that made it great.

      And the funniest thing is how several people claim they won't be submitting their links anymore. Who cares? Digg has so many submissions already -- if you cut this number by 90% it probably wouldn't reduce the quality of the content. It might even help it.
      • webscathe, on 01/24/2008, -1/+14Excellent points. When it comes down to it, and this is why we're in the state we are with our government, People in power will do whatever it takes to stay in power. Take a bit of the leverage away from the top diggers (like taking away lobbyist money from politicians...) and the playing field is leveled a bit. Of course top diggers aren't going to like it.

        These top diggers stepping down is perfect, it allows other people to be noticed more and helps stop the cronyism that has become so rampant here.
        • DephexTwin, on 01/25/2008, -0/+3If only there were a way to make major algorithmic tweaks to the way our government works, to level that playing field again.
      • ninerskeet, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1amen brother
    • zaibatsu, on 01/24/2008, -22/+8I don't even have a blog, and I'm not a ***** SEO. check my Digg submission history and show me a spammy post that I've submitted.

      ***** do your research before you rant.


      Hell I'll post a cute photo that I've never seen before and just get nailed saying that I'm Zaibatsu and I must see ever goddamn image on the interwebs.

      Andy, MU and I weren't bitching about the algorithm change just for our sake, hell we'll get onto the FP anyway.

      It's for the people with 20 or more FP stories being beat down by an algorithm that forces them to get 150 diggs just to hit the FP.

      Listen to thedrilldown, we went to bat for you guys with Kevin and Jay to fight for Digger everywhere. Listen for the ***** post and then bitch about us.
      • tonicboy, on 01/24/2008, -1/+17The cardinal mistake you guys make is attributing any kind of "value" to getting a story on the FP. You say you are fighting for mid-level Diggers who can't get stories to the FP anymore. Who the ***** cares? Are they losing money from this? Is their job in peril? Getting your article on the FP is just a stupid ego-trip anyway. Maybe these people will get a life with all their newfound free time. Meanwhile, Digg will continue on as normal with a new army of "low-level" Diggers who only have a handful of stories each.

        People are sick of you guys whining. Just shut up and go away.
        • EruLabs, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4Brilliant post. I got a single story to the "FP" back in 2006, I was pretty stoked. I havn't gotten a second one but I don't try either. I am a daily user of digg.
      • rejectpenguin, on 01/24/2008, -1/+6ANGRY GEEK!
      • MacintoshXP, on 01/24/2008, -3/+1http://digg.com/other_sports/Nerds_Launch_23_Foot_ ...
      • mille716, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3The issue for the rest of the digg community isn't that you or other top users get "nailed" when you submit stories but that you are guaranteed a FP for nearly every submission. In other words, you shouldn't necessarily have more of a hassle to FP a story but its not your right either as a top user. I know you're going to say you know its not your right but the demands to digg sure came off as sounding pretentious.
        Look, you guys clearly have submitted a lot to digg and deserve respect for that. I also appreciate the support for the mid-level users. What you have to understand though is the vast majority of digg users submit stories that just go nowhere. They then look at the front page and see your names again and again. It makes the rest of us feel like we've lost ownership of content and builds resentment towards you.
        By the way, I don't think you top users are really to blame so much as all the people who automatically digg whatever you submit.
      • AmazingAndrex, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Kids today and their expletives...
      • noseeme, on 01/26/2008, -1/+1Haha, you appear to be a pretty serious douchebag.
    • PDAIsAOk, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6I brought this up a few weeks ago and got buried into the ground. There are just a few diggers who really control what you see on the frontpage and regardless of the content I hate to come to digg and see 8 of the 15 front page stories at any one time be submitted by a handful of digg whores. And if you go through their submissions you will realize the majority of them are duplicates anyway. Instead of digging someone elses story the post it, get it dugg by their group of submitters, and off it goes.
    • sandstormrsx, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1I hope those diggers or elitiest on digg who think they should be special because of being the first to break a story leave digg if they are unhappy... seriously who really cares who posts up the next digg find as long as the popular ones get dugg bc it is a good find...
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -0/+2Dugg for great justice. So sick of seeing pizzler and her ***** stories!
    • mille716, on 01/25/2008, -0/+3Anyone else think the drones who mindlessly digg up the top users submissions are the true ones ***** up digg?
  • MAGZine, on 04/22/2008, -88/+16Nose out of Kevins butt, plz.
    • sockpuppets, on 01/24/2008, -22/+6...but it smells of suicide girl, it's kind of nice.
      • ayeroxor, on 01/24/2008, -4/+13smells like nasty dirty sluts with mommy and daddy issues? In what world do you think that would smell nice?
    • sorrow, on 01/24/2008, -4/+3Sorry for the comment abuse, but here is the article sans pictures etc:


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

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

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

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

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

      So in conclusion, there are other important websites besides yours, there is other VERY important information to be read on Digg.com besides yours. This community desperately needs to reach out to the general webmaster community and offer a fair opportunity to all, new and old Digg users alike.
  • rpi22, on 01/24/2008, -89/+7Hey, apparently digg thinks im a top digger because it took over 160 diggs to get fp'd today. Talk about feelings of ambivalence.
    • GRTWHT, on 01/24/2008, -2/+60Welcome to the digg of the rest of us.
      • ryland2, on 01/24/2008, -19/+3What the hell are you talking about, you've never had a submission get over 11...
        • DarknessGP, on 01/24/2008, -1/+35I agree, the digg of the rest of us, involves not getting FP'd period.
  • Kylde, on 01/24/2008, -18/+8spot on Brian!
  • largeora, on 01/24/2008, -9/+450Finally someone says the truth! Brian, please notice that many of these so called "top diggers" are SEO's/Marketers who promote sites for money. The digg changes will effect their business and that's why they are trying to create a problem on digg. This is not fiction, this is a fact. Look at their profiles and you will see that for your self!
    • mlostracco, on 01/24/2008, -1/+55I wish they'd fix it so 3/4 of the stories in the "upcoming" section weren't spam. Because of the endless spam and lame, milled-out press releases, I never go vote on upcoming stories any more. Worse still, so many of them are from the same sites or same sources—if the same PR and aggregator sites keep getting flagged as spam, shouldn't those not be able to be submitted (along with just canning the account holders)? And if an IP keeps getting flagged, block that IP instead of letting people sign up for account after account after account...
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/24/2008, -0/+15A lot of that is the result of news/blogs/reviews adding digg buttons to everything they publish.
      • sporb, on 01/24/2008, -1/+6then you end up with people spamming sites they want banned from digg.
      • mlostracco, on 01/24/2008, -2/+4When I wrote that comment, eleven of fifteen stories in the "upcoming" section's front page were spam.

        As for people trying to get sites banned by spamming them, there obviously needs be a mod involved to remove false flags, "always approve" certain sites, and permanently ban others. I mean, it's not like it's too tough to see that "DAILY DOMAIN DEALS FOR JANUARY 24!!!!!" from a website called something like domainsmakemoney.com needs to be permanently banned instead of being able to post 800 stores each day.
        • Waterrat, on 01/24/2008, -0/+2 I agree...And then there are the spammers promoting colon cleansing products"cures" for tinnitus, "miracle" herbs and juices,etc.
    • legendxx, on 01/24/2008, -3/+12got any examples?
    • gallardo, on 01/24/2008, -0/+22This was a much needed change. How do you think the most lame/obscure stories from Gawker Media or Weblogs Inc or other large sites/blogs always hit the main page? They have huge groups of people to help them game the system.

      Gawker Media (Gizmodo, Valleywag, etc) recently introduced a pay-per-traffic system for its editors rather than a pay-per-post or salary structure. This is 95% built around Gawker staff gaming Digg or otherwise getting their stories on Digg. Straight up... that's what it is. Why do you think Gawkers are all upset about this now?
      • mlostracco, on 01/24/2008, -4/+5Digg sanctions the Digg button people add to every single story on their stupid blogs.

        "My friends and I went to dinner last night lol and American Idol was soooo good last night k?..." [DIGG THIS]

        No.
    • javaroast, on 01/24/2008, -0/+15You are spot on with your assessment. These so-called top users are also whining about the bury brigade. I find it a bit of a stretch that they whine about a change that messes with their promotion-brigade and then whine about a bury brigade in the same breath. In the past digg has lost top-users. This isn't the first time, it won't be the last. But digg has just kept on growing. My prediction is that we won't even notice the loss of any of these guys.
    • bagelpirate, on 01/24/2008, -1/+3how much money are we talkin about here?
    • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -20/+6OK Digg fanboys listen up! Obviously you guys suffer from jelousy and slack ass submissions. So, tell you what. Let's take a look at what you obviously do not know.
      MrBabyMan, MSaleem and Zaibatsu are not SEO or Marketers as some idiot posted in this thread earlier.
      You see that section on your profile called friends? OMG it is there for a reason. Like minded individuals Digg their submissions. HOLY ***** WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT! There is a Fans section! Maybe those people like the stuff they submit as well. Well...what do you know..A POPULARITY RATIO! Well obviously people vote up what they submit.
      So in closing, unless you can find good content and submit it and raise your popularity ratio, you have no room to talk.
      Oh by the way, during the revolt that the Top Diggers held last night ( I was there) Jay Adelson and Kevin Rose actually joined the podcast to respond to the banning conspiracy and other things fishy that have been going on at Digg. So now for all you Digg fanboys the Top Diggers have done you a favor. Kevin and Jay are talking about opening up a Digg forum so people can address their concerns and the Digg staff will start being more interactive with the community. So before you start throwing stones, get your ***** facts straight. If Kevin Rose and Jay Adelson want to interact with them to make Digg a better community then obviously they see a need.The top Diggers probably just did more for you last night then you will ever know!
      • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -7/+2How about you get your facts from a real site and not some substandard ***** blog. You want facts? Here you go:
        http://www.techipedia.com/2008/kevin-rose-and-jay- ...
      • cranium, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6***** the "top Diggers". I hope they never come back. They're the number reason why the content on this site has been declining in quality. Go to reddit or something, we won't miss you.
        • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -6/+1Great reply cranium! Did you even read the ***** comment you idiot?
      • Dweller99, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3Yes, it''s all about Jealousy isn't it? It has nothing to do with people watching something they enjoyed going downhill and seeing the same few names pushing the crap to the front page every day.
        No, its because we are all jealous that we dont have some big number next to our handle on some website. someday I hope my e-penis will be as big as MrBabyMan, because that and $4 will get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks!
      • Ataxia2008, on 01/25/2008, -1/+2I think you should change your username due to the fact that you don't seem to ever shut your ***** mouth.
  • active1x0, on 01/24/2008, -57/+7And now a story makes the front page with 27 diggs?! Make up your mind, Kevin.
    • legendxx, on 01/24/2008, -3/+10Since you're knew I'll explain how this works. Or at least how it used to and probably still does now. It's not just a number of diggs before it gets to the front page. It's a diggs::time::category ratio. All 3 variables are taken into account.
      • Brad324, on 01/24/2008, -9/+7knew? Is it even possible to make that typo?
        • eldar, on 01/24/2008, -8/+5Is it possible to NOT get your ass kicked with a name like BRAD. I bet you are the unseen 5th Hobbit always under the table sucking Sam and Frodo off! Ok so I went a little Clerks 2 there.
  • tyzer, on 01/24/2008, -2/+56Anyone got a mirror of this story? i'd be interested to read it. thanks.
    • blueskydiver76, on 01/24/2008, -17/+3http://tinyurl.com/39bqxn I found a mirror.
    • Flanker, on 01/24/2008, -0/+18Mirror: Wah wah it's not fair! We're taking our ball and going away! You'll be sorry!
    • jambarama, on 01/24/2008, -0/+11I don't have a mirror, but here's the text: So Called Top Digg Users Cry About Digg Changes

      For years there has been a small group of Digg users who think they control the digg community. Kevin Rose http://blog.digg.com/?p=106 has posted a blog about the recent changes to the Digg.com algorithm that will change the future of digg and the small community that controls it.

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

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

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

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

      So in conclusion, there are other important websites besides yours, there is other VERY important information to be read on Digg.com besides yours. This community desperately needs to reach out to the general webmaster community and offer a fair opportunity to all, new and old Digg users alike.
  • Filipp0, on 01/24/2008, -7/+265I love that this article got to the front page with 27 diggs.
  • wukillabee, on 01/24/2008, -27/+9hahahhaa pwned!!

    if you dont like, then LEAVE!
  • david76, on 01/24/2008, -6/+4143 diggs. Site down. Poof.
  • Megane, on 01/24/2008, -17/+5WordPress again
    Error establishing a database connection....
    • m3mn0n, on 01/24/2008, -1/+5WordPress is not at fault for a weak shared web hosting server.
  • truspect0r, on 01/24/2008, -24/+4It's better than just-registered-noobs gaming digg
  • scabbers, on 01/24/2008, -9/+354The top diggers can suck my balls.
    • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -21/+6Mine too.
      • Yodwinder, on 01/24/2008, -15/+8Allow me to break this combo by saying that I would not allow top diggers to suck my balls seeing as most of them are probably men and therefore, it would make me gay.
        • dontaskagain, on 01/24/2008, -2/+13Only if you enjoyed it, They could suck my balls after a day at the gym
          • DarkSamus, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1forget the gym, since i don't go there

            zaibatsu, you're here already, you get a head start
    • borninda818, on 01/24/2008, -24/+1Is that really necessary?
      • ericcire, on 01/24/2008, -0/+34You've never had your balls sucked, have you?
    • heathuff23, on 01/24/2008, -1/+6MSaleem has sex with gerbils...I hate that dickwad and I don't digg anything he submits
  • exegesis48, on 01/24/2008, -2/+108I've long been frustrated by the lack of TRUE community offered by digg. I think any changes that are made to make things a bit more fair, are for the better!
    • AriaStar, on 01/24/2008, -6/+2It's community enough that I met my boyfriend thanks to Digg.
  • bubba9999, on 01/24/2008, -4/+52buh-bye little server that thought it could.
  • mcrosby, on 01/24/2008, -3/+17mirror please
    • cosmotic, on 01/24/2008, -5/+1Requesting a mirror after one has already been requested is really lame.
  • Lonyo, on 01/24/2008, -15/+42 stories on the front page with less than 30 diggs, and one with less than 150.
    Didn't that guy say it would take more than 200 to get to the front page?
    • srg13, on 01/24/2008, -0/+16As has been explained since the beginning of Digg - it's not only the number of diggs that gets a story promoted to the front page.
    • akatherder, on 01/24/2008, -0/+10Yep, that just proved him wrong.

      Let's say you have 27 people from different parts of the world who rarely digg stories. They all digg the same story in a very short timespan and you'll find it on the front page.

      If you have 200 people who digg EVERYTHING and have dugg the same submitter's stories EVERY time they submit anything, and the story comes from a site that was buried several times in the past week... you might have a harder time getting the story to the front page.
  • proxypants, on 01/24/2008, -4/+193The end of the "old digg" was the endless iphone sories "top diggers" have been pushing for a year! Goodbye top diggers, you will not be missed!
    • ChaosMotor, on 01/24/2008, -2/+17Good God, Apple and iPhone stories, two things I don't care if I never hear of again. I have a screenshot where 8 of the top 10 stories are about Apple. E-*****-nough.
      • SpectralSounds, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6Now they are all about scientology.
      • appleswitch, on 01/24/2008, -5/+1You know you can turn off categories right? or do you just prefer to bitch twice a year when new mac stuff is released
    • zaibatsu, on 01/24/2008, -14/+2I'm not going anywhere. Bring it. I'll go toe to toe with you guys anytime defending my submission on digg. Find the crap and show it to me, please.

      Oh and I like my iPhone.

      Z
      • seanc6610, on 01/24/2008, -1/+4that's unnecessary. "top diggers" should just stfu for a while.
    • MrTito, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3Amen. They leave, it creates a vacuum. Others will fill that void. People without years of submissions, inflated network of friends, and out to pimp sites for profit. New people, with better content will rise up. It will create...what's that word? Oh, diversity!

      I say leave, and if they don't then maybe those of us who are sick of this crap should build an honest Bury Brigade to put them in their place. Everyone controls Digg. Not just an elite few.
    • Dweller99, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4This happens every few months it seems. What was the names of the guys who left for Netscape? Anyone remember? They were "top diggers" too and when they left, did anyone even notice?
  • natdowner, on 01/24/2008, -21/+3Maybe I missed the boat, but I thought this change affected everyone. I thought everyone, top digger or not, needed 200 votes to get a fp story. So while you may be rejoicing in the difficulties top diggers will face now, aren't you going to face the same thing?
    • d4nie1, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3Look at the front page. Right now the first story has 93 diggs, so clearly you do not need 200 diggs to reach the front page.
  • lekahe, on 01/24/2008, -19/+4I dugg this story but it reached the front page with about 50 diggs. Mine needed 126 and I am not a top submitter. I have just managed a couple of times in a shot period. Is this fair???
    • jctambay, on 01/24/2008, -1/+32It's not a ***** competition, you don't get a prize if your story makes it to the front page, and you don't get laid any more. The website is about sharing interesting information with each other, not who's name gets put on what.
      • TyCage, on 01/24/2008, -3/+9> ...and you don't get laid any more.

        Wait. We used to get laid for getting a story promoted?
        • lintmonkey, on 01/24/2008, -2/+11No, he said "any more", not to be confused with "anymore".
  • cbrunet, on 01/24/2008, -2/+14All these changes and people still can't stop the digg effect.
    • noseeme, on 01/24/2008, -1/+4Seems irrelevant.
    • m3mn0n, on 01/24/2008, -0/+2No considering I can't read the article because the site's dead.
  • LordFate, on 01/24/2008, -10/+1Of course I control the Diggs! Don't you know how popular I am on the internets?! Mwahahaha!
  • Lacero, on 01/24/2008, -23/+2what's the point of this article? bitter? blog spam? what? who gives a flying *****. buried for lameness.
  • morphie, on 01/24/2008, -3/+9Well, time for some social life, instead of social networking then...
  • smacksaw, on 01/24/2008, -27/+2This is front page with 87 Diggs by my count...

    This is at 144 and is not:
    http://digg.com/tech_news/Digg_is_a_Game_Let_s_Pla ...

    The one that supports the top users isn't there but the one that mocks them is.

    I think there's a little more than a "better" algorithm at work here...

    For or against the top users, it's still not democratised if someone is moderating. A mod is not a top user, they're a superuser.
    • Nougat, on 01/24/2008, -1/+18That's because it got buried yesterday. Because it's whiny tripe.
    • jctambay, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6THis was submitted less than an hour ago . . . the other story has been up for many. Its not about the number, but about the speed at which people are digging.
    • brstilson, on 01/24/2008, -1/+27No one gives a ***** about the "top users" except themselves. Why the hell should I be "thankful" to them? What have they ever done? Gotten stories on the front page? Please. These douchebags act like the site wouldn't function without them. As if NO ONE ELSE ever finds the articles they submit. They need to wake up and realize that if they were gone, everything would be the same. In fact, things would probably be improved. Oh, and threatening to "leave?" BAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA That's like a homeless person complaining about the long lines at the shelter. Beggars can't be choosers.

      No top digg users deserves any more of my respect than anyone else, and anyone that disagrees can suck it. They do nothing for me and nothing for the community. They submit a lot of stories to a free social news website, big ***** deal. The fact that they waste hours a day on this site means I should revere them as gods? ***** that *****. In closing, to all "top digg users" who are threatening to leave over this: BYE! Good riddance! Couldn't have happened any sooner!
      • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6Yeah dude.
        ***** these digg supersubmitters.
      • smacksaw, on 01/24/2008, -6/+1Well, I'll play devil's advocate on this - however these people accumulated friends, they did it. They created an audience for what they wanted to push. In a way they shaped Digg from being more than just a tech site. Now maybe that's not what some people want from Digg, but the fact remains that as it's interests broadened it grew.

        Maybe these people have simply outlived their usefulness?

        I like Digg how it is now, for the most part. I never really felt a need to come here very much until FARK.com got all Web 2.0 and the admins mocked the users. Anyone who stayed on FARK after that has no pride. Digg isn't that bad...yet.

        I tend to agree with you. Most of these users suck, but it doesn't mean they bring NOTHING to the table. I still stand by my original post that I think there are people actively moderating Digg behind the scenes and simply giving the smackdown to top users doesn't fix the problem, but shift it's weight to the mods (which we now know actually exist).
        • thcobbs, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3And if you're trying to push an agenda, whats to stop you form making hundreds of fake accounts to grow your friends list?
    • 2oonhed, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1because it's not a news story. Its a blog on blogspot. blogspot is used extensively by blog spammers with new accounts.
  • daxsymbiont, on 01/24/2008, -3/+126top diggers = topic spammers?
    • tickets1st, on 01/24/2008, -2/+12Less of the "?" please.
      • yodaj007, on 01/24/2008, -10/+2Less? A question mark is commonly used to denote a question. Did you miss this in school or something?
        • tickets1st, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4I learned in school how to formulate a question, if that's what you mean.
  • STKD, on 01/24/2008, -9/+43Frankly I'd settle for not having to log in again every few hours... silly, broken digg.
    • ThirdPrize, on 01/24/2008, -2/+6I agree. Surely its a basic function they should have got right by now.
      • Waterrat, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1 Digg remembers me for weeks...(Fire Fox user.)
    • BDOUG, on 01/24/2008, -2/+7More like every few minutes. If Yahoo can remember me for 2 weeks why can't Digg remember me for a day?
    • notman, on 01/24/2008, -2/+13Oh god thank you for mentioning this. I thought I was alone in this problem. Seems like every time I want to digg something or reply to it, I have to log in, even though my login info is at the top of the screen and a reply box is available :/
    • scabbers, on 01/24/2008, -1/+3When that logout thing happens, deleting the cookie seems to work for me.
    • mdoenges, on 01/24/2008, -7/+18Ok guys, check your browsers, its not digg,
      I have not had to log in for over 3 days
      • dumpyhumpy, on 01/24/2008, -2/+11I have 3 laptops (xp, mac and ubuntu) and I never have to log in on any of them... fyi I use firefox on all.
      • thcobbs, on 01/24/2008, -6/+8Imagine this:

        - Paranoid digg user deletes cookies to keep from being tracked and cleans their session
        - Digg forgets they logged in

        AMAZING!
      • blisk, on 01/24/2008, -2/+5Naw man i've had this issue with digg forever. Donno what it is and i don't clear cookies.
      • Optic7, on 01/24/2008, -3/+4Same here. I use firefox and never have to login. These folks that have this problem must be because of an IE problem or their security/privacy settings.
      • ep53, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3I used to have the problem of having to logg in to digg every few hours then after all the IE bashing i was reading EVERYWHERE i switched to FireFox and have not had to log in for MONTHS.
      • SpectralSounds, on 01/24/2008, -0/+2I used to have this problem as of a couple weeks ago, it lasted for a few months. It was horrible. Now, it is magically fixed. I didnt do anything on my end, so I assume the Digg team is working on a fix
    • smacksaw, on 01/24/2008, -3/+1I want my Greasemonkey script back that shows how many diggs up or down a post gets.
      • smacksaw, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3Actually, it looks like that the "Continue, Stop Script" timeout thing has been semi-fixed, but it's not fully loading the page and that's what is causing it. I'm getting errors when I post instead of when I load. Comment not saved, etc.
      • 2oonhed, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Greasemonkey just updated to v.0.720080121.0. My DiggRatingExtender still works.
    • Archeologist, on 01/24/2008, -3/+2 I've only gotten logged out maybe 3 times last year. Those were when I cleared my cookies. Get over it.
    • pruppert, on 01/24/2008, -1/+7I cannot remember the last time I deleted my cookies, yet digg always has me log in again to post a reply or digg/bury even though I check the Remember Me box.
      • dawnraid101, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1same this always happens in safari for windows.
    • jedinate, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1This is a problem, thankfully I don't have. My pcs generally stay logged into digg until I run CC.
  • znicket, on 01/24/2008, -1/+23I'm all for leveling the playing field. That will stop the overly excited 14 year olds to band together and promote stories about irrelevant crap. Digg has a lot of potential - it would be a shame to let it descend to the lowest denominator.
  • rhabd0mancer, on 01/24/2008, -3/+130Somebody call the Wahhhhmbulance.
    • diggymow, on 01/24/2008, -4/+20He's got a case of over inflated Internet ego doctor!
      Administer 100ccs of Get the f*#k over yourself stat!
    • hellathatguy, on 01/24/2008, -1/+1that comment was amazing. my roommates were like wtf. are you laughing so loud about. all hail my friend. all hail.
  • gameradam, on 01/24/2008, -11/+10***** no mirrors :S

    http://duggmirror.com/tech_news/So_Called_Top_Digg ...
    • Outdoor83, on 01/24/2008, -2/+1whiff
    • narcofiche, on 01/24/2008, -2/+3Conspiracy! Repressing the truth!
    • cosmotic, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Thanks for letting everyone know. You could have just not commented.
  • mcrosby, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5Surely diggs from users who digg / submit all the time shouldn't carry so much weight as diggs from people who don't digg / submit as much? Or is this already part of the algorithm? Wish someone had cached this article before it went down!
    • banmaster, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Actually, at the moment its exactly the opposite from you you just said.
  • Hazardc, on 01/24/2008, -1/+159I read their little whining story (by them, i mean "top users") last night, and assumed that a lot of digg agreed with them on their stance that the new changes sucked

    then i read the comments and saw that the majority of digg was laughing in their face, and it restored my faith in this site 100%

    Good job to Kevin and the rest of the staff, this is the best change made in a lonnnng time!!!
  • Sogui, on 01/24/2008, -13/+8As long as it does something about the Ron Paul forums *playing* Digg.

    In other news if you ever want something to hit the front page, just go post it on the Ron Paul forums, give a shout out to Ron Paul in the description and your first comment and watch the Diggs flood in!
    • artemus, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Um, sorry to burst your bubble pal, but none of the top diggers are the ones promoting Ron Paul stories. It is the grassroots that are promoting the stories, and even then it is difficult, because Digg is the one actively working to suppress these stories. Apparently, the words popularity, and censorship never entered your vocabulary. Sorry, but Ron Paul IS an electoral candidate, and his supporters are a part of this community. And we're not going anywhere, no matter what is thrown at us. By the way, if you don't like it, go somewhere else where no one can hear your bitching
  • chrisbosh123, on 01/24/2008, -4/+12I can see this issue from both sides,

    for the top diggers: if it requires at least 200 diggs to get to the front page, how will a new users with no network even have a slight change of getting a story that is worthy to the front page?

    Against top diggers: They have NOTHING to complain about about THEIR story getting on the front page, they usually get over 200 diggs anyways.

    so in conclusion, Top diggers, STOP WHINING ABOUT YOUR ARTICLE NOT BEING ABLE TO GET ON THE FRONT PAGE FAST ENOUGH!! on the other hand, thanks for mentioning that new users will have a less chance of making it on the front page due to this change.
    • thugok, on 01/24/2008, -0/+16"...how will a new users with no network even have a slight change of getting a story that is worthy to the front page?"
      I think you are missing the point. The story itself should be what carries it to the front page, not the friends network of the submitter. So JohhnyNoName and MrSpammer have the same chance to hit the font page if the both submit articles that don't suck.
      • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -1/+11I disagree with you. I have submitted a story, about africa launching its first satt. a few months ago. 7 diggs. 3 days later, someone else (top digger) submits the article, 700 odd diggs. I was at the ***** launch!
        • hansondr, on 01/24/2008, -0/+13The problem is there isn't enough "normal" digg users browsing the upcoming stories to potentially digg up interesting stories like you mentioned.
          • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4I think you are right.
          • EJTower, on 01/24/2008, -0/+7standard democratic system problem. A small minority of people do the research, dig around for new information, and influence things early on. The rest just vote for whatever ends up in front of them.
          • Kronos6948, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3Hansondr, you're right. I'm part of the problem. I haven't looked at upcoming stories a lot because every time I do, there's usually a lot of spam to sift through. Maybe now that the algorithm has changed, I should start looking again.
        • allatti2d, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Maybe more people want to submit stories than actually read them?
  • page2, on 01/24/2008, -0/+6I've seen people saying this is really going to hurt Digg, but from what I can tell it's just going to make more people click back to the incoming submissions to see what they like. It's a change, but when somebody says Digg is going to completely fail as a result of this, I take it to mean that that one person is going to quit coming to the site in protest... for about a day.
  • phoomp, on 01/24/2008, -18/+3The recording industry has the Labels.
    File sharing has the Scene
    Digg has the Top Users
  • gooovil, on 01/24/2008, -6/+1~_~ I need a mirror in my bathroom :-( Can't believe it is already down.
  • noseeme, on 01/24/2008, -1/+21msaleem, mrbabyman, and zaibatsu seem to be the top 3 diggers. I wonder who's taking it the hardest?
    • scabbers, on 01/24/2008, -0/+11Pizzler is taking it hard.
      • lintmonkey, on 01/24/2008, -2/+18That's what she said.
      • Oomsoup, on 01/24/2008, -1/+2I like Pizzler. She seems quieter than the other top submitters and I usually enjoy the things she submits more.
    • Sidzilla, on 01/24/2008, -0/+15All I know is that today is the first time I looked at the front page and they didn't have two or three stories each. Yay!!!!
    • tman84, on 01/24/2008, -1/+16I bury all of their stories out of principle. Funny they they have yet to comment on or digg this story.
      • narcofiche, on 01/24/2008, -2/+3Apparently, they have principles too - but after reading these comments, I'm sure that'll change pretty quickly.
      • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -1/+2Zaibatsu has been commenting refresh your browser and take a look.
      • SilentJay74, on 01/24/2008, -4/+1Wow tman you are awesome 0 stories popular and you down vote top submitters. Jackass
        • tdous, on 01/25/2008, -1/+1As is his right as a user, regardless of stats. Is the emphasis you place on these stats as a measure of the worthiness of a user's actions or comments supposed to dispell the common feeling that the site is maliciously "gamed" for the sake of acheiving higher stats? You see the problem there right?
    • Bamborzled, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1msaleem. He's part of the "RevolveNation" blag or whatever it is, and he's the one who spammed it. As far as I'm concerned, he can pack his bags and go somewhere else.
  • chriskzoo, on 01/24/2008, -0/+50All these "Top Diggers" can take their dumb asses elsewhere. Digg 1.0 is when Digg was truly great.
    • smacksaw, on 01/24/2008, -1/+4Wait...let me guess. Top Diggers are the cancer that are killing /Digg/
    • motionblur, on 01/24/2008, -1/+1chriskzoo - I would digg you up into infinity if I could. Digg 1.0 was the *****. The interface was horrid, but the functionality was simple and solid. When the Paris Hilton story hit, the site was at its 1.0 peak.
      • ZigVicious, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1crap, I meant to digg you up. +1 digg.
  • Versh, on 01/24/2008, -2/+3 I dunno, I never really thought submitting was that much of a big deal-- I like having other dedicated people searching the internet for news, videos, images, and miscellaneous items of interest. It gives a whole population of aimless browsers a direction, and in turn, a service to the information hungry community. I just wish there was a way to prevent repeats and old stories from reaching the front page...
    • allatti2d, on 01/24/2008, -0/+7I appreciate repeats and old stories that I haven't seen; I guess that's just me, because I will often miss stories the first time around. But I can see how people who come to Digg every day would grow tired of that.
    • 2oonhed, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4repeated stories are annoying if you have already read them.....but I myself have taken advantage of repeated stories that I missed earlier, and was glad they were repeated.
      • Waterrat, on 01/24/2008, -0/+2Same here...There are always going to be little nuggets you will miss.
    • Drax0n, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3THe point is the top diggers were making tens if not houndreds of thousands of dollars a year MANIPULATING digg, getting their clients pages on the front of digg than charging their clients for the traffic "they" brought to the site.

      IMO anyone who works in the marketing industry should be BANNED from submitting to digg.
      • Waterrat, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Drax0n ..Well said.
        A zillion virtual Diggs for you!
      • Versh, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1I suppose so, and yeah I agree absolutely. A biased slant paid by established networks from top members defeats the purpose of Digg. I was just referring to the common user being unable to make it to the front page with a couple hundred diggs while top diggers can make the front page in 30 or so. That's no the big deal. Article racketeering is though...
  • uselessexpert, on 01/24/2008, -6/+32***** all the "top" diggers!
  • cyberworm, on 01/24/2008, -0/+39All of this talk about who's "story" makes the front page or not. I barely come to Digg anymore because it's become all about the submitter, and not whether or not what is being submitted is worthwhile. Maybe I'm mistaken, but wasn't community based editing supposed to be about weeding out the crap instead of who made the front page the fastest?

    The story should get the publicity on it's merit and not by who posted it.

    • Kronos6948, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5That's what this new algorithm is supposed to help.
    • kerzhaw, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1Exactly. This to me is the most important thing, and the mind boggles to see how many people are overlooking this point. I'm sick of the sensationalist boring rubbish getting to the top of the heap every day.
  • QGYH2, on 01/24/2008, -3/+43From what I've been able to gather, this is what digg is doing:
    - lets say a top 10 user has a story with 200 votes

    of those votes lets say (for example)

    25 are from random people who saw it and liked it - these votes are counted
    50 are from friends who have a pattern of voting for some stories from this top user - ones they like - these votes are also counted to the score.
    125 votes are from friends who upmod everything this top user posts, and as such the system ignores their votes.

    So, the story has 75 'real' votes and the rest are ignored.

    The top users are panicked because they counted on their adoring fans to blindly vote up anything they submit, and now they will have no choice but to come up with good content, just like any ordinary user, to reach the front page.

    So, needless to say, they did the one thing they would be expected to do: post a message saying they are going to quit digg tilts the system back in their favor:

    http://thedrilldown.com/?p=58
    • keru, on 01/24/2008, -0/+21you know what? we don't care if those users leave...that'll be victory for us, without all the logarithms.
      • ratbear, on 01/24/2008, -0/+8I have been around Digg long enough to see this happen every time a major change is made that affects the "top users". They all bitch and whine and threaten to leave, and in the end, they stay. So to all the obsesive nerds that consider themselves "top diggers": ***** you.
    • Sidzilla, on 01/24/2008, -0/+11I left them a nice little post telling them that Digg was glad they were gone. I encourage any one else who is tired of their crappy content, duplicate stories, and general selfishness to do the same.
      • allatti2d, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5I think they delete those messages.
        • sekhui, on 01/24/2008, -0/+5because it's not censorship as long as they're winning, but god forbid they have to hear some criticism.
    • allholy1, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1you hit it right on. This is how digg should be.
    • banmaster, on 01/24/2008, -1/+1Thats all well and good, but it makes it very difficult for diggers who don't have groups of followers to get anything to the FP, much harder than before.
      • kerzhaw, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1It is unfortunate that the virus in the system must be killed, ahead of the need to get important information to the front.
    • mphree, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3That Drilldown title bothers me.

      "The Digg Community’s Concerns With Digg"

      I think most of the community is in favor of the new changes and there's just a few of the more bitchy ones complaining because their stories wont always be on the front page. I have been under the impression that Digg is community driven? Community meaning everyone, not the top three submitters. And, Zaibatsu: STFU.
    • TheLastFreeMan, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Wow, a positive correlation in the Number of Digg stories reaching the front page vs. Size of Digg user's E-Penis.

      So that's why they do it.
  • Araxen, on 01/24/2008, -20/+72***** Yeah, no more Ron Paul Spam!!!
    • bxblox, on 01/24/2008, -13/+7I dont remember the last RP story that was on the front page... dont be such a whiner
      • chix0r, on 01/24/2008, -4/+10It was back before he started losing every single primary. :) You know, since the primaries started.
        • 15charmaxwtf, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3He's come 2nd in two! Though I guess 2nd is the first loser.
    • d03boy, on 01/24/2008, -3/+12I don't think RP spam is from top diggers :)
      • Myonosken, on 01/24/2008, -1/+10Yes but its always the same group who Digg the stories. The new algorithm weakens their digging of each others stories.
        • artemus, on 01/24/2008, -0/+2Um, the group that diggs Ron Paul stories, is much larger than the ones who Digg them down, so I don't know where that comes from.
        • Bamborzled, on 01/25/2008, -0/+1The new algo looks at the "diversity" of diggs, and weighs them accordingly. If "RonPaul4Ever2008" (who doesn't actually exist... yet) diggs all Ron Paul articles, every time he diggs another one of the same article, the strength of the digg will be reduced. On the other hand, if "JohnMcCainFan" diggs a Ron Paul article, his Digg will have more weight than the Ron Paul supporter's.
    • jestrella, on 01/24/2008, -3/+2use the filters offered in "Customize" - disable Political
    • werkerb33, on 01/24/2008, -3/+3But Scientology junk is all over the top stories now. I don't like the nutcases either...but five of the top ten? Who cares that much?

      Laugh at them and move on, but don't clog up half the front page.
    • 07sheikh, on 01/24/2008, -3/+4VOTE FOR RON PAUL! hhahahahahahahahahahahahaha
  • WoundedCow, on 01/24/2008, -1/+12I wanted to be an elitist, but I'm too poor, too bald, too divorced, too straight, too devout, and have a dog who bites people in the ankle...not elitist material I guess.
    • jaybol, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1this is the single funniest thing i have read in a long time
  • borez, on 01/24/2008, -1/+10As I said before, let's have a 'No shouts allowed week.' Just to see what happens.
  • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -3/+96Ticks me off... I submit an article, no one diggs it. Someone else submits it 3 days later, it makes the front page. That sucks even worse than corrupt politicians.
    • cyberworm, on 01/24/2008, -6/+10Not to be snarky (ok, maybe a little), but why does it matter so much that it would tick you off?


      • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -4/+33Well, if you REALLY have to know, cause it was about the 1st African satellite launch. I'm African. Then some American *****, who couldn't find Ghana on a map, posts the same story. And JUST because, he has a ***** of friends added, his story makes it front page. His source, was American. Mine was African. Sort of like, the first African in space, was actually born in the US. You get it?
        • Ahweb, on 01/24/2008, -1/+10I can understand your position...
          Don't give up :)
        • Wartz, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4i'd add you as a friend but then my diggs would be useless.
    • Hewolf1982, on 01/24/2008, -15/+1Yeah because Digg means more to harm society then corrupt politicians do. Get a life.
      • Sinudeity, on 01/24/2008, -3/+8It was a metaphor *****. Go be negative somewhere else.
        • Hewolf1982, on 01/24/2008, -8/+1Yeah a very stupid ignorant metaphor.
    • d03boy, on 01/24/2008, -3/+2You have to tell people about it... that's the trick.
    • soulmist, on 01/24/2008, -2/+4If you had voted for Ron Paul...
  • DietRitePure0, on 01/24/2008, -3/+51A little perspective: "elitists", on Digg? If these folks are so desperate to be the aristocracy of an Internet website that generally features among its top content pictures of cats, videos of cats, and scarcely sourced political blogs, we may as well let them have it. If their top ambition in life, or among them anyway, is to control the flow of cat and Apple related links to an Internet website, let us pity these poor saps and let them have their "elite" status.
    • tickets1st, on 01/24/2008, -0/+9You forgot to mention their articles saying how crap Digg has become.
    • KingGorilla, on 01/24/2008, -0/+8Cats and aristocracy? Didn't disney make a movie about that?
      • Fiyerstorm, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4
        Everybody wants to be a cat,
        Because a cat's the only cat
        Who knows where it's at.
        Everybody's pickin' up on that feline beat,
        'Cause everything else is obsolete.
    • employeeno5, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1I started to write a post identical in sentiment to yours, but when I spotted yours I saw no reason to try to say it better.
    • noseeme, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1That was probably the best comment I've read on digg in months.
  • Bamont, on 01/24/2008, -0/+3All I read was "Digg" and "Cry" and knew it had to be an article destined for glory on the front page.
  • somespecial, on 01/24/2008, -0/+4Digg users are crying because they have an error establishing a database connection?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 142 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.