Digg "Hooligans" Take Over Website
Digg is a news website with an emphasis on technology and science articles. News stories and websites are submitted by users, and then promoted to the front page through a user-based ranking system. However, rumors have recently circulated that many of the stories are planted and users are paid to move them to the top of the charts.
As a regular visitor, I enjoy checking out the most popular stories and the comments from other users (even if they are planted). If you're looking for a crazy story, a funny video, or breaking news... you can always find something interesting at digg.com.
But, I've noticed that user comments have gotten out of control. These days, it's hard to find an article submission that isn't full of offensive comments and blatant disrespect for other users. Some threads are more about bashing other users than they are about commenting on the articles itself.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that use of foul language and hooliganism might be exactly what the average Digg user enjoys. But, in my humble opinion, Digg really needs to eliminate this type of behavior if they want to become a mainstream source of information for all ages and all types of users.
Average users no longer post comments because they fear being ridiculed or "dugg down" for a logical statement. This leaves many stories littered with unsophisticated banter among those who find humor in making fun of others. Unless something is changed, such as implementing conduct standards, the comment system will forever be doomed to this childish behavior.
[Update]- This story has been Dugg. Click the link below to view comments.
Labels: blogging, cws, digg, hooligan, social bookmarking
posted by Alan De Keyrel @ 2:52 PM
28 comments
28 Comments:
As I commented on Digg, I agree to a point. I also think that Digg's comment moderation system hides a large portion of the inflamatory posts, while also allowing anyone who might be sensitive to such remarks to hide even more.
Personally, I think Digg could be well served if they implemented a basic "karma" like system similar to Slashdot's. Here's the thought: start out with a default comment score of 0. If enough people digg your comments down, your future comments will start at a -1, or -2. If your comments get dugg up enough, you'll start with a 1 or 2. Seems like this would filter out the perpetual "hooligans".
Dear Anita :
Tits or GTFO.
Thank you,
Digg.
I agree completely. It's a big part of the reason why I no longer post much on Digg. It's even worse than the commenters on Slashdot, which is saying something.
yes but then the hooligans will try and out dig the standard comments and so on and so on. I just would like to state that the internet is a dirty place and personally I think it should be illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to access the internet.
This is exactly why I don't post at Digg.
Well you can see exactly what you're talking about by just reading the comments springing up on your digg story right now. I tried to digg them all down but there's just too many of them.
That could lead to these fakers holding more control over Digg. I think your "rating", "karma" or whatever you call it should effect your ability and those of your peers to have more of a swing over bringing articles to the front page.
It's the curse of becoming popular -- when you attract a lot of attention, you get attention from all varities of folks...
Even if digg added a "karma" system like its cousin at Slashdot, it would *still* be rendered ineffective due to the immaturity present among many community members.
The only way to battle the "hooligans" is to take away their "toys" which are the tools being abused.
Kill the "bury" button. Remove voting capabilities for each comment (if you don't like a comment, don't vote for it ... let it stay at "0") and so on.
There is no sure solution, but if digg is to survive in the long-term, the technology must address the community -- the primary source of its growing pains.
Personally, I'd like to see the "bury" tool given an early funeral
It isn't just on Digg. It is everywhere. There have always been trolls, but now you have a mix of genuine wackos with technology who don't have a voice in real life, so they spew hate on the Internet.
Welcome to freedom of speech. While you may not like it everyone has the right to saw what they like.
If you don't believe in freedom of speech for all then you don't believe in it at all.
Anita..the problem with that idea is that too many people also use the comment votes selfishly. In any thread regarding a passionate topic (Apple, RIAA, Microsoft, Sony, etc.) no matter WHAT someone posts that is anti-Apple, nop matter how factual it is, it will get dugg down. So people would have their karma ratings go WAY down just for not going along with the Digg majority, which in general is part of a tiny minority for "regular" people.
A good example of this was a recent submission for a blog that CLAIMED tha Apple had left pornogoraphy on a refurbished
Mac. Of course, the blogger neverprovided any proof that this really occurred. He was rightfully blasted and the authenticity was questions. However, when similar unsubstantiated accusations are made against Dell, or Microsofot, or whatever, with zero evidence, and someone has the nerve to say "How do we know this blogger is telling the truth." they get buried and the Apple comunity screams that they must work for Microsoft (or Dell, etc.) and aere trying to cover up the facts.
Um...anonymous...Freedom of Speech has absolutely NOTHING to do with a privately owned internet site like Digg. Seriously...don't start throwing around big phrases like Freedom of Speech unless you truly understand what it means.
Your blog = shit. Your blog doesn't belong on Digg. Oh PS fuck you. *insert other insults here*
One thing that they could do which would be very simpleand would help a lot is to have a separate place for debates. Maybe allow every user name a certain number of comments per submission. 2 or 3 would be plenty. After that, if they want to get into a flame war with someone, they would have to go to a corresponding "debate forum" that would mirror the comments page. That way, people who don't want to get stuck in a flame war can still read the original comments, and those that do can still go there.
As someone that had to deal with moderating a popular forum for a few years, I can tell you that Tards beget Tards. When the signal to noise ratio gets out of wack the top people split with a bad taste in their mouths. whats left? the larger part of the bell curve masses to rule and thats a bad thing indeed.
I suggest that digg start trashing the BS talking kiddies by removing their posting rights for a month or so - until they grow up.
yeah, it's a pain ... but it works,
I've noticed that a large number of stories submitted tend to be nothing more than blogs or sites giving a brief summary of that story. It's turning into nothing more than shameless self-promotion by people looking to up the traffic to their sites.
The past couple of weeks I've noticed good, insightful comments being dugg down and it leaves me scratching my head.
I wish there was a simple way of weeding out the spammers and attention whores from everyone else, but that's hard since the "good" users tend to be the ones who suffer.
Hmm, gone to war and fought for your freedom, will that work for you? The fact that the site is privately owned makes no difference what so ever. Freedom of Speech does not end at a door to a building or a website it extends everywhere. If you dont like the comments just dont read them. i dont appreciate some of the comments ive read but who am i to tell them not to say it or not to print it, who are you to tell them what the can and cant say or allow on their site.
1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.
Are the comments hurting your rights or reputation? The answer is no.
Like others have said, this is why I don't post comments on Digg anymore. Normally I don't care, but more and more, important stories on the issues of politics, medicine, and other topics are being submitted to the site. Trying to have a conversation about the topic is like arguing with a brick wall. That's why I don't even bother anymore.
Digg'll be dead in a year. The worthless will win in the end.
Perhaps it's the declining tone of our society: there's always so much bad news going on that it's no wonder that people are taking on a more negative viewpoint. I am personally always amazed at how many negative comments an entirely positive story, such as a world-record or so, will pull in on DIGG.com. Maybe the hooligans are always more outspoken on the Internet than positive people.
Freedom of Speech does NOt apply to the internet that is privately owner. You are using their bandwidth for free. They candelete you for ANY reason they want . Your reply clearly indicates that you DON'T know what freedom of speech means. It ONLY applies to the GOVERNMENT. It has never applied to private sites, homes, stores, etc. And it never will. Nor should it. Clearly you did not join the military or you would know this.
To the "freedom of speech" ignorant person...so, you are suggesting that someone can walk into your provate home and say anything they want and you can't do anything about it? You need to quit while you are behind, because it absolutely does only apply to gvovernment, and not to private sites, even private sites like the internet.
For example...if you walk into a store, they have every right to throw you out for any reason they choose, other than racial or other prejudice reasons. But they can legally say "I don't like the t-shirt you are wearing, you must leave." You have ZERO protection to speak freely using your t-shirt in their establishment.
Look it up.
I really like the karma system. But there is one problem. The system might fail if friends of hooligans start digging up their friends' not so great comments.
A reasonable person wouldn't care about commenting on Digg. Leave it to the masses who think that their comments actually make a difference. The value of Digg is in the linked articles, not in what the "Digg community" a.k.a. the "Web community" thinks.
Anyway, I use reddit.com.
I've been dugg down for making comments critical of excess of government power, etc. Shows that we're dealing with sheeple here.
This is a very nice website wish he all the best.
The Digg co-founder says the company is focused on improving Digg and rolling out great features. But, it is also said that their source on the story is very good and they stick by their report that Digg is talking to either Google or Microsoft or both.
--------------
Adam
Social Bookmarking
Post a Comment
<< Home