I have been a member of the Social Networking community for the better part of a decade, long before “social networking” became a meme. As such, it has been my privilege to watch the internet, some web sites and users mature and prosper. Lately there has been much ado about Digg and its recent massive banning of users. Digg is a web site that allows you to bookmark articles and allows users to vote on whether or not they are good or relevant. Social bookmarking sites allow users to make friends, share content and give you insight into each other’s preferences. In addition, and without a doubt the most used function, Social Bookmarking allows a web page, blog or news post, to see significant increase traffic.
The internet is a competitive market place, there is no such thing as one web site having a corner on a particular niche (tell me if you find one). When a web site, any web site, is not treating its customers fairly, there are usually ample alternatives that the masses can utilize to that do the same thing. In the case of Digg’s faux pas, you can use Mixx, Stumble, Reddit, and Delicious or a variety of other web sites.
Why is Digg’s ban significant?
In terms of traffic Digg is considered to be the number one social bookmarking site on the web. My guess is, they are about to lose that distinction. For any web site to be successful and maintain that success, they have to have certain qualities that separate it from the crowd. They must be consistent, reliable and put the community first. According to recent reports, the moderators behind Digg have not reflected any of these qualities.
Reliable: I have often credited Digg for not being so predictable as to have a “formula” for getting on the front page, thereby making its organic methods open to abuse. By the same token, because Digg is not entirely automated, there is obvious favoritism in some of the sites that do hit the front page. For a web site to be successful, the system must be reliable and trustworthy.
Community First: Digg exists for the benefit of its members, or at least it should. Digg is supposed to make it easier to find articles of interest. People of like taste are supposed to be able to share those articles with ease through the use of Digg. While there does exist some blatant abuse of the systems (in all social networking sites), some of the reasons Digg has mentioned for the bans are thin at best. If I Digg a story and at a later point in time, the author changes that story to an ad, why should I be the one who is accountable for that web site’s content? Digg hasn’t given its members (and in some cases former advocates) the benefit of the doubt. This in turn translates into Digg caring more about Digg (worth how much?) and less about the people who use the web site. This, in my opinion, is unacceptable.
So, for those of you who are Digg users (or used to be) check out some other options and look for me to reconnect to (although I have not been banned by Digg, I don’t see myself using the site as enthusiastically as I did before).
- Delicious: http://delicious.com/newward
- Mixx: http://www.mixx.com/users/newward
- StumbleUpon: http://newward.stumbleupon.com
Great post! I totally and completely agree with your thoughts. I was active on Digg before, but you really need to stick with it and make a large group of friends there to actually get noticed!
Digg is just like a Tech Blogs aggregator/RSS Feed for me now!
1. it’s not “fopaux” it’s “faux pas”
2 “lose” not “loose”
3. I will not take your writings seriously until you have improved your English (including French bastardisations stolen by English)
4. Rumors of DIGG’s death are greatly exaggerated (but I do think the userbase will take a hit.
You have got to be joking me. Digg is one of the best websites created, there are users who abuse the system and actions need to be taken, quit your whining you insignificant p****.
Thanks for the article. Would be useful to see some references/examples. As it is it just seems like a bit of a rant.
sometimes, I get puzzled by the digg algorithm..At times, you can see the most irrelevant story coming up in a technology section. They need to sharpen their algorithm a bit better
Hmm love it or hate it, digg is the best destination to get community recognition.
But most stories that get digged are done by a handful of people as thats how it will always be.
Well I am a “supercoder” with 22 years experience and running my own enterprise software co.. , I know exactly what to do to beat digg on the technical side. And I can code up a digg replacement in a couple of weeks if you can market it and get the people coming in.. let me know
Not to mention that the digg user base is overwhelmingly socialist/democratic/liberal. Don’t bother joining digg if you are a capitalist, a Republican (or even libertarian, as I am), believe in smaller federal government, are against cradle-to-grave social welfare programs espoused by the left, or are generally sane, cogent and self reliant. You will not be welcome on digg; in fact you will be the subject of much scorn and ridicule. How dare you not be enslaved by an ever larger nanny state!
Yes, may I have another please! LOL
Thanks for all the comments!
@Rob – thank you – typos corrected
@JP How does an article with 357 thumbs up votes not appear at the top of the DIGG listings under tech when a post with 150 votes is #1 in the same time frame?
@Martin – this post will be used as an example (along with others)
Well written article. Points out digg’s failings. Biggest fail is to its members.
Not such an unbiased site as they claim. The algorithm is probably controlled by a guy sitting in a computer room who chooses which reach the front page.
Didn’t David Chen write up a longer version of this article 4 days earlier?
Sure seems like it to me.
I haven’t become active with DIGG as it is on the lower end of a to do list because of negative things I have heard about it in the past and this info just confirms some of my thoughts.
Thanks for the info Sherman
@ScreenRant I hadn’t read it – but thanks for the link
I am working on a site which try to solve many of the problems with digg.com.
You can find it on http://crowdnews.eu.
The main problem with digg is the voting system.
When only top voted stories get on the front page it has
to be a subject that many can relate to,
which result in stories with a low information content.
Crowdnews solves this by using sharing instead of voting.
Every have a personal news page on which they can subscribe to other users and when those users share stories they will appear on the personal news page.
Join me on CrowdNews