Yet Another Top Digger Gets Banned

A few days ago the number 7th Digg user, Karim ([supernova17](, got banned from Digg for [submitting a story for money]( With Digg becoming a popular social news site that is becoming increasingly attractive to companies, it seems that more and more top users are being offered money for submissions and with all the talk from Jason Calacanis about [top Digg users getting paid by PR firms]( it appears that yet another Digg user’s account just got banned.
[Snipehack]( was the 13th most popular Digg user and now his profile is invalid. I am not sure if he got paid for a submission, did something wrong or did nothing at all, but it seems that Digg is making a statement to all the top users that if you do something that Digg management doesn’t like or that is against their [terms of service](, your account will be banned.

Neil Patel
Neil Patel is the co-founder of KISSmetrics, an analytics provider that helps companies make better business decisions. Neil also blogs about marketing and entrepreneurship at Quick Sprout.

Comments are closed.

10 thoughts on “Yet Another Top Digger Gets Banned

  1. Guess this just makes the price go up for top diggers submitting stories for money considering the risk is increasinly elevated.

  2. If you notice these guys submit about 30-40 stories in a day. thats a lot of work seems the lure of sneaking in a story for money along with legitimate stories must be really strong. DIGG seriously needs to compensate some of its top diggers. maybe be not with money but other incentives how about a free T-shirt Every month.

  3. Scribez, if would be nice if they compensated, but I don’t think Digg ever will.
    Lisa, I agree. I think advertisers are still going to try and manipulate Digg.
    Kelvin, I think people in less fortunate countries are already farming Digg profiles.

  4. I’m bored with digg, the gaming, the banning, I find reading the blogs on topics I like in my reader more productive.

  5. I agree with Jeremy, I’d much rather have quality, with Digg’s top users submitting 30-40 stories every day on top of all the other users, that’s a lot of content, how many of those submissions are great? or even good? It’s way too much content to sift through.

  6. I have a question. If an agency submits linkbait to digg as part of it’s campaign, is that a case of the digger being paid (if the digger is an agency employee and it’s all done openly)?

  7. Does Digg do anything about users that submit links that do not get past the single vote? Should that be a way to judge the quality of the users instead? I mean, a person can Digg for a fee, but as long as the article is of quality, why should he be banned?