Comments on: Who cares if it’s true, lets Digg it!

By: Jared

Jared — Tue, 05 Dec 2006 02:27:33 +0000

I think the problem is that digg does not make sure you view the story before you digg it. It would be nice if they could come up with a way to view the actual story without navigating to far away from the page.

By: HoGiHung

HoGiHung — Sun, 03 Dec 2006 03:33:51 +0000

I used to like Digg alot. But of late, it is more about getting trash to the front page or insulting other people through the comment section. It appears to be ran by a group of “power diggers” and rarely are any of the follow up comments constructive. It is a shame because I think the intent of the website was great. Maybe the Digg staff can find a way to to set a level playing field. If not, hopefully they will have the right mind to dismantle the site.

Ho…

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 04:48:28 +0000

I remember seeing a post that talks about how many posts get dugg without even going to the corresponding website, and if they do, just give it a cursory look.

By: MacBigot

MacBigot — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:58:24 +0000

Once it made it, this editiorial sure disappeared from Digg’s front page fast!

By: Rikki-Tikki-Tavi

Rikki-Tikki-Tavi — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:42:58 +0000

Moreover, Digg has become an instrument of shameless self-promotion. Political lobbyists have been found using Digg to drive traffic to their own sites, but otherwise contribute nothing to the Digg community.

http://www.calacanis.com/2006/10/05/thinkprogress-org-shows-up-at-netscape-and-digg-and-folks-are-n/

By: jay

jay — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:31:55 +0000

What’s funny is you are doing what you blog about. (the hits thing)

“Seems like the best way to get publicity (and hits) for your web site these days…”

By: Justin Cook

Justin Cook — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 17:07:49 +0000

hmm, I guess I’d better stop concentrating on quality content, and just get some dubious/controversial posts up on my site!

By: Brent

Brent — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:20:23 +0000

{sigh} It seems that people, myself included, sometimes need to be reminded that not everything on the web is true. I’d like to think that I’m savvy enough to recognize a particularly questionable article, but I suffer from the same tendency to digg an article based on title and description alone.

Now in slight defense, the amount of diggs doesn’t necessarily correlate to the number of believers in the article. I often use digg as a social bookmark tool for websites that I want to check later, but don’t want to add to my own bookmarks.

Tangentially related, I wonder what percentage of diggs are, indeed, bookmarks for later use and not endorsements of a particular story.

By: Mike Talmadge

Mike Talmadge — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:35:34 +0000

Here is a current extreme prime “SAD” example. http://digg.com/tech_news/Get_me_out_of_this_job

P.S. I did not support it.

By: stevievep

stevievep — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:03:18 +0000

Too true, Adam. I am a supporter and user of Digg too. I appreciate the fan base, good with the bad and I enjoy the Diggnation podcast with Alex and Kevin. I was overjoyed to attend their live ‘taping’ in La Jolla during the Comic-Con weekend here. There is some credibility to thousands of registered users clicking and making a story notable (as opposed to 3 or 4 ‘diggs’ on a major mainstream site like Netscape), but all in all there is a great deal of caveat emptor as applied to visitors who simply say ‘Front page of Digg = verified news’. Many times this is simply not the case. This is part of the allure of Digg. It never meant (at least in my opinion) to be a traditional news site, it is social news. In other words, the type of thing you would talk about in a water cooler or bar setting on the web with 1000s of participants. Good post, regardless of the validity of this particular story.