Digg’s Recent Bans and the Limits of Crowdsourcing

Comments (15)

1. • cGt2099

   Nice to see Social Blend get a mention!

   • (3 Kudos received)
   1. • pleeker

      @cGt2099 Agreed. And overall, I think the last two sentences really sum it up nicely:

      "Digg may continue to grow in traffic and size, but with every controversial move like the recent banning measures, it will irritate a continually growing contingent of its most ardent supporters. Unless Digg can find a way to embrace its fans rather than eliminate them, it will find its brand promise as the leader of news democratization fading fast."

      • (4 Kudos received)
2. • Kronich

   very well written article... Kudos.

   • (0 Kudos received)
3. • Basye

   Kevin said they always give users a second chance?
   That's bullshit.

   • (4 Kudos received)
   1. • LdsNana

      @Basye Yup... I did not get any fore-warning that I was doing anything wrong:-(

      • (0 Kudos received)
4. • LdsNana

   For someone like myself (LdsAskMormon) who is now a digg refugee, and was ignorantly banned from digg; this was a very informative article for understanding what the heck is going on. I'm just glad I have mixx:-)

   • (1 Kudos received)
5. • The_Plagiarist

   I was almost ready to vote this article up but upon looking at the meat of the article, many things were just poorly written.

   >>>True Democratization of News is Difficult<<<

   What the...? Before this, the article was talking all about how Digg tried to game the system as opposed to the system failing and this was the conclusion?

   >>>Digg became less a democracy and more a republic, with a select few users responsible for the majority of front page stories. <<<

   This isn't how a Republic works. In fact, this is exactly the common accused flaw of Democracy where the majority overwhelm the minority. Again, what the...?

   >>>although sites that automate the process (e.g. Techmeme) or sites that rely on editors (e.g. Fark, Slashdot) are at least more transparent with their advantages and failings.<<<

   What the...? x 3

   More transparent? I get that it is better in some areas but how in the world did it become more transparent?

   >>>Recognition is a Key Motivator<<<
   >>>People like being recognized for contributions and the potential for Internet fame that may follow. Social networks that have gone on to insanely high valuations or become profit-making ventures have recognized this fundamental fact of Web 2.0. Digg has not.<<<

   I get that the recent bannings were horrible but on what planet did Digg fail to promote Internet fame? The frontpage might be flawed but that's also a criticism that can be applied to all social media frontpages. Digg's is worst but that still doesn't mean it didn't help propel many sites out there.

   That's just stupid. Of course, submitting your entry on a more popular social media site and getting tons of Digg is equivalent to achieving Internet Fame status. This section just contradicted itself by trying too hard to just say Digg didn't care for it's power users.

   >>>A comparison between Digg and Mixx quickly shows that while the former’s traffic still trounces the latter’s, Mixx’s founders and employees have been open about how they are fostering the growth of their website. Anecdotal comparisons between, say, “The Drill Down” podcast (which covers tech news as well as social news sites like Digg) and Mixx’s unofficial podcast, “Social Blend,” starkly contrast how each company has dealt with its fanbase. While Digg and its policies are frequently an object of criticism on “The Drill Down,” “Social Blend’s” contributors typically have nothing but kind things to say about their digital overlords.<<<

   I, like the next Mixxer like it when Mixx gets noticed but this just reads like shilling. How can you ignore Reddit and use Mixx mainly as your example? This just makes it look like the author was intending to write the article solely to promote Mixx rather than create an analysis of Digg's problems.

   I don't mind the podcast comparison since at least that is accurate but as far as openness, Mixx isn't totally without it's critics either.

   This line really shouldn't have been brought up as it makes the article look too pro-Mixx when it too has it's flaws.

   • (1 Kudos received)
6. DirectTulip left a comment and deleted it .
   1. • MacBookForMe

      @DirectTulip ...old saying goes: "Power corrupts, an absolute power corrupts absolutely."

      • (0 Kudos received)
7. • tazzahall

   A pretty in depth article- nice read.

   • (0 Kudos received)
8. • onlysc

   interesting read

   • (0 Kudos received)
9. • steaprok

   Hopefully more people continue to make the jump from Digg to Mixx, and leave Digg for the trolls and flamers. Long live Mixxx!!

   • (1 Kudos received)
10. • irfanmp

    The author ends it with "I am Digg user whose account has not been banned…yet." Oh boy, I know exactly how he/she feels.

    • (0 Kudos received)
11. • exMixxer

    very nice article nice read

    • (0 Kudos received)
12. • finleymax

    Its very nice information you had posted.

    • (0 Kudos received)

Add Your Comment Digg’s Recent Bans and the Limits of Crowdsourcing

Login now to post your comment.