Sphinn - Ding Dong, Digg is Dead

52
Sphinn It!

Ding Dong, Digg is Dead

Went Hot: December 20, 2007 - 10:26 am
Posted By: AndyBeard 296 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://www.copyblogger.com)
Category: Bookmarking

Brian is now convinced that his site is on autobury

12 Comments

Who Desphunn This (0)

Comments

from Gab 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

This is a duplicate: http://sphinn.com/story/19627

On a related note, the dupe filters here aren't working so well lately. This same thing happened for something Maki and i both submitted.

from SearchBuzz 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Proof that Digg is not a community controlled by its users.....

from SearchBuzz 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Gab --> the dup. filter will only catch an identical url. (i believe)
Either way, I Sphunn both!! Thanks for the heads up.

from AndyBeard 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

The other story is a blog linking to Brian plus Tamar and Marketing Pilgrim, and actually where I picked up Brian's post from.

I submitted the main story URL

from AndyBeard 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

p.s. I didn't Sphinn the other post from personal choice, I much prefer posts with substantial commentary - the links are valuable for someone who hasn't read the previous posts, but I am not sure that is enough to justify it reaching the front page.

from patrickaltoft 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Brian will have to focus his efforts on Sphinn instead. :-)

from patrickaltoft 296 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

I don’t think he is on the auto bury list. Sites on auto bury have their posts removed from the list below until you click the “include buried stories” box. Brians stories are still there.

http://digg.com/search?s=copyblogger&submit=Search&section=all&type=url&area=all&sort=new

He might have been buried by the bury brigade on a regular basis but that’s a different thing to being on the bury list. That works to bury your stories within 3 hours even if they get only a couple of diggs which doesn’t seem to be happening here.

from AndyBeard 295 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

I haven't gone Digging into the evidence, but he does have prominent Diggers writing for him such as Mu, so I assumed that the verdict was quite conclusive.

Some diggers seem to have attracted quite fanatical bury brigade shadows.

from DoshDosh 295 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

When a site gets buried at 20 or sometimes even less than 10 diggs... its hard not to believe that its not on the autobury list. I think Brian's last post got buried when it was under 20 diggs, at a point when not many people come across the submission yet, let alone vote it up..same thing happens for articles from Dosh Dosh, which can get buried at less than 10 diggs.

Unless there's an organized group of buriers subscribing to notifications of anything submitted from a domain or there's the auto-bury list... I think its the latter.

from jeffquipp 295 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Agreed DoshDosh ... how much variablity is there in the number of diggs received when the site is ultimately buried? If its a program, it should be relatively consisent given mutliple variables.

I do think there's a very active anti-seo Digg brigade, and I think I'm seeing evidence of it on Stumble somewhat now too.

from BrettFromTibet 295 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

Buries are heartbreaking. Administrative burries are worse.

While I really can empathize with Brian's frustrations, but I think he is overreacting a little. He should give things some time and have some different people submit his stuff. A big-league blogger with 30k subscribers shouldn't need Digg or Google's approval or feel the need to taunt people with elementary school names.

There is no question that Digg admins hand-bury stuff for a variety of reasons, but in my opinion they are usually kind of "fair "about it (from a community perspective, not necessarily from a marketer or linkbaiter's perspective ;)

Here's my take on the unspoken Digg staff editorial policy:

Specific articles can be censored (hand-buried) if they go against the grain of the admins or Digg advertisers

Self-promoters who are too successful can have their sites blocked (usually temporarily).

Submitters and/or sites that reach the front page too frequently & too quickly can be handicaped (usually temporarily). I think Copyblogger might be here.

Digg is good at reading patterns and getting better at sorting out genuine buzz traction from favors and group voting networks.

Digg content is defined by the politics and prejudices of an elite group (top users and admins) and it has always been that way.

from unglued 295 days ago #

Votes: 0 | Vote:

+ -

>>Digg content is defined by the politics and prejudices of an elite group (top users and admins) and it has always been that way.

Sounds like old media to me. Let's just drop the hype about how Digg is different, and you'll never see me complain again.