Comments on: Why is Digg.com Taking the “Social” out of Social Media?

By: Reddit User

Reddit User — Sat, 30 May 2009 12:36:55 +0000

Note from Ann: We have placed this comment to where it belongs: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/devious-reddit/10454/

By: Gerald Weber

Gerald Weber — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 15:43:12 +0000

@John,

Well I personally don’t have a problem with it. I have heard others complain about it though.

Thanks for reading and commenting. :-)

By: John

John — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 15:37:46 +0000

Great article. Although, not sure why you’d have a prob w’ Digg limiting to 200 dpd? Sounds ’sound’ to me, to keep things fair, no?

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 09:44:16 +0000

Gerald, good catch… this sounds like eBay all over again to me, but in a different space. Let’s hope others don’t also get “too big for their boots” and act this way. It’s always to their detriment in the end.

Of course, being what it is, the social network/blogosphere will respond, as you have done, and can choose to go other ways to avoid such heavy-handedness.

By: Gerald Weber

Gerald Weber — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:52:06 +0000

@Brian ,

I agree removing the links was an odd move. It was even more odd how they suddenly put them back yesterday.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:36:37 +0000

Removing the links from profiles was an odd move, and one that probably wasn’t very well thought out. Every site out there lets you have a profile where you can do at least a little of what you want.
The other changes you refer to are actually smart and useful to 90% of Digg users. Digg was fast becoming a place where new users felt like they had nothing to gain or offer by being there. With “power users” just Digging each other back and forth, it was fast becoming an online version of the Good Old Boys Network. The truth is that Digg’s future is and always has been in the reader, and not in the submitter.

By: Gerald Weber

Gerald Weber — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:36:59 +0000

@Alisa,

I agree with you. Digg.com is basically a control freak. Gamers will game and the game will go on but at the end of the day Digg itself picks and chooses what goes on the FP. It’s an addictive mind game yes but it’s not a democracy nor is it about the collective wisdom of the masses as they would have people believe.

Thanks for your comment and insight.

By: Alisa Bowman

Alisa Bowman — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:50:40 +0000

This is the weird thing with Digg. They promote Digging things by asking users to put Digg buttons on their site, and then they penalize you for getting too many diggs. They should just decide which way they want it. In the end, no matter how many people try to game the digg system, dumb sites won’t rise to the top because they are dumb. Digg is worrying too much about nothing, and they are going to drive their site into a big hole as a result.

By: Gerald Weber

Gerald Weber — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:32:49 +0000

@Tom,

I’m not saying that I dislike Digg, however I have to say that was the perfect rant.

Thanks for commenting. :-)

By: Tom Galloway

Tom Galloway — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:06:03 +0000

Um, Digg is a scam anyway. No one should be surprised that they’ve pulled stunts like this. I dropped them the first month they were in operation, and every system I have now blocks *anything* associated with Digg, especially those “Digg It” tags that slow down page loads unnecessarily. The sooner Digg dies, the better off the Internet will be.