Comments on: Getting Buried On Digg: Still a Black Box, Still Open For Abuse http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/ Thoughts on Web 2.0, Social Media, Marketing. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:10:44 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: The Digg Bury Effect » Technology, Blogging and New Media http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-18386 The Digg Bury Effect » Technology, Blogging and New Media Wed, 28 Feb 2007 05:40:39 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-18386 [...] Digg has come under increasing fire as they continue to tread deafly through the internet world. Kevin Rose inspires the entire organization to arrogance that carries through to corporate policies and down to the Digg Mob that buries stories it doesn’t like simply because they don’t like them. The problem with Digg is in the democratic system. Or rather the non-democratic system. Diggers on the surface have the ability to Digg an entry or bury an entry. This is great in an honor-system kind of way because every vote counts (how often have we heard that mantra?) and every voice matters. If the community doesn’t like something, a sufficient number of “Burys” will stifle the story. If the community finds a story worthwhile, in theory, the story will have legs. [...] [...] Digg has come under increasing fire as they continue to tread deafly through the internet world. Kevin Rose inspires the entire organization to arrogance that carries through to corporate policies and down to the Digg Mob that buries stories it doesn’t like simply because they don’t like them. The problem with Digg is in the democratic system. Or rather the non-democratic system. Diggers on the surface have the ability to Digg an entry or bury an entry. This is great in an honor-system kind of way because every vote counts (how often have we heard that mantra?) and every voice matters. If the community doesn’t like something, a sufficient number of “Burys” will stifle the story. If the community finds a story worthwhile, in theory, the story will have legs. [...]

]]> By: baron http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-8053 baron Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:29:15 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-8053 I'm of the belief that Digg's so-called algorithm is not as sophisticated as many are lead to assume. I think it's more or less driven by the top 5% Digg submitters. As long as you keep them happy and give their submissions weight, it'll give off the illusion of an intelligent algorithm. The bury/ban "algorithm" was more or less tacked on as the site became more popular and being tweaked as we speak. However, their "lifetime ban" policy which is akin to "three strikes and you get life" is probably good indication that they really don't have a good grasp of handling it programmatically just yet and there is a lot of human intervention at play. Just my 2 cents. I’m of the belief that Digg’s so-called algorithm is not as sophisticated as many are lead to assume. I think it’s more or less driven by the top 5% Digg submitters. As long as you keep them happy and give their submissions weight, it’ll give off the illusion of an intelligent algorithm.

The bury/ban “algorithm” was more or less tacked on as the site became more popular and being tweaked as we speak. However, their “lifetime ban” policy which is akin to “three strikes and you get life” is probably good indication that they really don’t have a good grasp of handling it programmatically just yet and there is a lot of human intervention at play.

Just my 2 cents.

]]> By: kelvin newman http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-8046 kelvin newman Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:55:49 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-8046 It's nice to think that the algo for dealing with buries is as complex as those dealing with the diggs. While the fact the community is right to flag stuff they don't like it would make digg a less interesting place if it was easy to game a story down like John imagines. It’s nice to think that the algo for dealing with buries is as complex as those dealing with the diggs. While the fact the community is right to flag stuff they don’t like it would make digg a less interesting place if it was easy to game a story down like John imagines.

]]> By: Techscape » Blog Archive » Web 2.0 news: Burying Digg stories, Technorati woes, Wikiseek, Boxxet, Nimbuzz Talk http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-8042 Techscape » Blog Archive » Web 2.0 news: Burying Digg stories, Technorati woes, Wikiseek, Boxxet, Nimbuzz Talk Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:11:25 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-8042 [...] Tony Hung has written an interesting post about articles getting buried on Digg, reflecting on the ‘black box’ that determines how easy it is for a group of people to bury articles or even entire sites: “Digg needs to have its population police its own content, because it doesn’t have the manpower (two guys at last count) to try and do it themselves. This leaves room for enormous abuse, as individuals can bury stories with abandon and get entire domains banned with little recourse to getting them reinstated, since the a large part of the process is automated. [...] [...] Tony Hung has written an interesting post about articles getting buried on Digg, reflecting on the ‘black box’ that determines how easy it is for a group of people to bury articles or even entire sites: “Digg needs to have its population police its own content, because it doesn’t have the manpower (two guys at last count) to try and do it themselves. This leaves room for enormous abuse, as individuals can bury stories with abandon and get entire domains banned with little recourse to getting them reinstated, since the a large part of the process is automated. [...]

]]> By: Socially Driven Today, 01-16-2006 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-8031 Socially Driven Today, 01-16-2006 Wed, 17 Jan 2007 06:53:09 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-8031 [...] Tony Hung’s take: ‘Getting Buried On Digg: Still a Black Box, Still Open For Abuse‘ [...] [...] Tony Hung’s take: ‘Getting Buried On Digg: Still a Black Box, Still Open For Abuse‘ [...]

]]> By: Socially Driven Today, 01-16-2006 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-8032 Socially Driven Today, 01-16-2006 Wed, 17 Jan 2007 06:53:09 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-8032 [...] Tony Hung’s take: ‘Getting Buried On Digg: Still a Black Box, Still Open For Abuse‘ [...] [...] Tony Hung’s take: ‘Getting Buried On Digg: Still a Black Box, Still Open For Abuse‘ [...]

]]> By: The Blog Of Tanner Godarzi » Blog Archives » John Chow: “10 Buries To Down A Digg Story.” Not So http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/comment-page-1/#comment-8025 The Blog Of Tanner Godarzi » Blog Archives » John Chow: “10 Buries To Down A Digg Story.” Not So Wed, 17 Jan 2007 04:25:01 +0000 http://www.deepjiveinterests.com/2007/01/16/getting-buried-on-digg-still-a-black-box-still-open-for-abuse/#comment-8025 [...] Now back to John Chow. Evidently his “10 buries to kill a story” is very inaccurate. What was not factored in was: what criteria was used to bury the content, who buried and how many Diggs the story had. It already seems Digg has an Algorithm for credibility ranking and saying a flat 10 buries will remove a post, without factoring in so many variants warrants suspicion. As Deep Jive Interests reports on the subject “First of all, Digg constantly tweaks its algorithms … whatever existed a few months ago to get John banned may not exist in the same way today.” Not only do Algorithms play a huge part but so does user ranking as well. It’s been known for quite some time higher ranked users have more influence on story promotion and outside activites. Depending on who buried it could determine the weight of their bury. Even choosing different criteria to bury can have a great or lesser effect. My guess is “Spam” and “Inaccurate” have a greater bury weight than “Duplicate Story”, “Ok This Is Lame” and “Wrong Topic.” Basically, this preset 10 buries rule couldn’t hold a candle to anything and with so many variants to factor in, the possibility of Digg ranking stories based on credibility, who submitted the story and who buried it could not warrant a preset amount of buries for that story. [...] [...] Now back to John Chow. Evidently his “10 buries to kill a story” is very inaccurate. What was not factored in was: what criteria was used to bury the content, who buried and how many Diggs the story had. It already seems Digg has an Algorithm for credibility ranking and saying a flat 10 buries will remove a post, without factoring in so many variants warrants suspicion. As Deep Jive Interests reports on the subject “First of all, Digg constantly tweaks its algorithms … whatever existed a few months ago to get John banned may not exist in the same way today.” Not only do Algorithms play a huge part but so does user ranking as well. It’s been known for quite some time higher ranked users have more influence on story promotion and outside activites. Depending on who buried it could determine the weight of their bury. Even choosing different criteria to bury can have a great or lesser effect. My guess is “Spam” and “Inaccurate” have a greater bury weight than “Duplicate Story”, “Ok This Is Lame” and “Wrong Topic.” Basically, this preset 10 buries rule couldn’t hold a candle to anything and with so many variants to factor in, the possibility of Digg ranking stories based on credibility, who submitted the story and who buried it could not warrant a preset amount of buries for that story. [...]

]]>