Spammers, Blind Voters and "Top Users"... Hint it's Not Digg view story

Comments (14)

1. • Zaibatsu

   No comments Mixxers?

   • (0 Kudos received)
2. • mortalwind

   First rule of fight club.............

   • (0 Kudos received)
3. • SilentJay74

   Second rule of fight club.......

   • (0 Kudos received)
4. • Albionshores

   The 3rd rule of fight club is if somebody says 'stop' or goes limp you have to stop. It's a rule that carries broad application.

   http://www.diggingforfire.net/FightClub/

   • (0 Kudos received)
5. • mattaw101

   Darn it, I was to late commenting, Jay already stole my second rule. That being said, what about the fourth rule of fight club - spammers are shown no mercy

   • (0 Kudos received)
6. • hdar3415

   Mixx does a pretty good job of getting rid of spammers. It's just that they keep coming back and there are a lot of them.

   • (0 Kudos received)
7. • calinazaret

   I'm voting this down because it's a link to digg which links back to the mixxingbowl. Wtf? Why not just link to the mixxingbowl? That link hasn't been submitted yet as far as I know. You're spamming mixxers to get diggs, plain and simple.

   • (1 Kudos received)
8. • cGt2099

   I'm afraid I have to agree with Julie on this one, Reg. Love ya to death, bro, but the original MixxingBowl thread probably should have been the submit.

   • (1 Kudos received)
9. • MarkCarras

   Well, I voted it up because it's another excuse to bring up the subject. Also, the fact that it is a link on Digg makes a point Mixxers should pay attention to. Doing it this way might make one think about this from a different direction.

   • (0 Kudos received)
10. • Albionshores

    It's not a chicken and egg scenario. Which came first? The Digg submission about Mixx.

    Maybe Zaibatsu wasn't submitting the Mixxingbowl thread to Mixx because he was actually saying instead, "hey Mixx there's a Mixx thread on Digg" and he just copied the Digg submission's description.

    In which case I think submitting the Digg article was fine.

    • (0 Kudos received)
11. • calinazaret

    @Albionshores but he submitted it to digg. It's not like he found it and then submitted it here. He submitted it in both places at almost exactly the same time, so you can't even say that he submitted it to digg and then, later, thought about submitting it to mixx.

    And, he didn't even bother to edit the description to fit the mixx page. He wrote it for the digg page and it got cut off on the mixx page. I generally like Zaibatsu's submits but I'm calling big huge fail on this one.

    • (0 Kudos received)
12. • Albionshores

    @calinazaret
    Yeah that's what I meant babes. He submitted it to Digg (he is a Digger after all) as a story about Mixx. He then, possibly (only Reg can answer for himself - maybe he is guilty/ballsed up) thought that people at Mixx would like to know about a Mixx story on Digg and submitted that story as a story in it's own right to Mixx, but was lazy and used the same description.

    I know I'm playing defence lawyer here but I'm just saying that there maybe a reason why it appears as it does on Mixx other than plying for Digg votes.

    • (0 Kudos received)
13. • w0lfh0und

    I haven't invested nearly enough time here compared to other sites and was regretably ingnorant to some of these issues and the extent of the problem.

    However it is linked, rightly or wrongly, this remains interesting and significant content.

    • (0 Kudos received)
14. • The_Plagiarist

    So whatever came of this conpiracy? I've been waiting for Zaibatsu's answer to Calinazaret and Albionshores' hypothesis but still nothing.

    Ok, just kidding. I'm just wondering when Zaibatsu will return to Mixx again and update his comments section.

    • (0 Kudos received)

Add Your Comment Spammers, Blind Voters and "Top Users"... Hint it's Not Digg

Login now to post your comment.