The Digg Police: over 750 posts about the new Digg got buried

22 Sep

It’s obvious that not everybody is equally happy about the recent changes at Digg. While Technorati shows an increase in blog posts about Digg, it’s weird to see that only one negative post made it to the front page. And it wasn’t even a really negative post.

So what happened to all those other Digg criticizing posts, because I can’t imagine that this was the only one. Well, they got buried. Apparently, The Digg Police only wants positive posts to make it to the front page. Want to know how much posts about the redesign got buried? Take a look at these images.

Without all buried stories, 241 pages with stories about “new Digg”show up.

But with all buried stories included, Digg’s search function returns 323 pages. Over 80 pages with 10 stories suddenly appear. Because searching for “new Digg” stories does not only return stories about the redesign, it’s more likely that around 750 stories about the New Digg got buried. Including quality stories with sometimes over a hundred diggs.

UPDATE: This post got buried as well…

So, over to Google Shared Stuff or StumbleUpon, everybody?

9 Responses to “The Digg Police: over 750 posts about the new Digg got buried”

  1. weee September 24, 2007 at 10:07 am #

    Digg is so busy digging itself a grave it’s forgotten that most of us who use the internet hold the concept of freedom of speech dear to our heart.
    Digg – get your head out of the sand; listen and stop trying to oppress any criticism. It doesn’t work in the long term.

  2. franklin September 24, 2007 at 10:29 pm #

    The bury brigade is very active on posts relating to Ron Paul, see
    I hope that fixes this bury abuse issue.

  3. Anonymous September 25, 2007 at 2:48 pm #

    Franklin: here’s the thing – outside a small but increasing amount of Digg spammers, nobody cares about Ron Paul.

    I’m politically apathetic. But ever since the influx of stories on Digg about Ron Paul, my curiosity got the best of me and I asked people in my family and career circles if they were going to vote for him. Their response: “Who is Ron Paul?”

    The problem with your marketing tactic is that you’re preaching to people who 1. don’t care and 2. you do it excessively. Perhaps instead of focusing on promoting lames stories about Ron Paul on Digg, you can focus your marketing efforts to people who have no clue who he is. It’s a waste of time to piss more and more people off; if the bury brigade exists at Digg, you can imagine that he’ll never make it as the next president of the United States. Too many people hate him, and that’s probably because of people like you who rub this false notion of Ron Paul’s potential success into people’s heads.

    Now you know why Ron Paul isn’t liked on Digg.

  4. Brighter September 25, 2007 at 3:14 pm #

    Please shut up about the Ron Paul spam, not that much makes the front page anymore, disable politics and bury it if its in the wrong topic. I am getting really annoyed with all the people who complain about Ron Paul spam more than the spammers (if you can even call them that) themselves. Disclaimer: I like Ron Paul and am not a spammer.

    About digg, there is definitely a “Digg Police” group of mods. That is probably why they made their new interface so easily abused. Digg doesn’t make much money off the AdBlock wearing “Diggers”. While MySpace and Facebook attract that ‘dumb’ internet crowd, that will click on those new flash advertisements. That dumb internet crowd is always looking for the next big thing and Mr. Rose just wanted to stick is hand out. The sad part is, digg is only hurting its loyal base, whose users come from the blogosphere. There wasn’t a positive viral response to it, them censoring the viral response …. This is going to be interesting.

  5. franklin September 25, 2007 at 3:58 pm #

    @Anonymous – I’m not a Ron Paul supporter, notice that the article wasn’t written by me, I just thought it highlighted the large amount of ‘non-spam’ items that get buried on Digg only because someone or some group doesn’t agree with them. That is not the definition of spam. I just think that the bury feature is toooo powerful and should perhaps be more like reddit’s mod down.

    @Brighter – I completely agree that there seems to be two types of internet users, those that click on ads and those that are savvy enough not to. All the anti-adblock stuff is over blown since the number of people who use it is quite small and most likely those people are the type that wouldn’t click on the ad anyway.


  6. Anonymous September 25, 2007 at 7:42 pm #

    “I just thought it highlighted the large amount of ‘non-spam’ items that get buried on Digg only because someone or some group doesn’t agree with them.”

    I think that’s where you and I differ. The amount of news coverage on Digg about Ron Paul for some reason exceeds the combined amount of news coverage on all the other potential presidential candidates. It looks clearly gamed. Stories that have amassed 200+ Diggs in 2 hours are clearly spammed by Ron Paul supporters, and this is finally getting on the nerves of those of us who want to use Digg for real news.

    Yes, that means that we refer to Ron Paul stuff as spam. There’s no possible way (unless you’re Gizmodo/Engadget and are blogging about an iPhone launch OR if you’re Digg and you’re announcing a brand new feature) for stories to accumulate that many Diggs in such a short period of time. In other words, only truly breaking news hits the frontpage of Digg. Everything else that gets that many votes in such a short period of time is spam.

    @Brighter: I did not refer to you as a spammer. However, as someone who likes Ron Paul and wants him to get proper coverage, you might want to ask your friends who do spam Digg with RP stories to give it up for reasons I mention above.

    The bottom line: from the perspective of people who don’t like Ron Paul, he has overstayed his 15 minutes of fame on Digg. We are sick of it. If you really like him and think he has a chance at becoming the next president of the USA, educate those people who don’t use Digg and are clueless about Ron Paul.

  7. franklin September 25, 2007 at 7:51 pm #

    @Anonymous – valid points, I still don’t like the digg bury feature, it is simply too powerful. I really enjoyed digg back in the day before that feature was added. I’m not saying digg sucks now but just that the front page contains less relevant items – at least to me.

  8. Anonymous September 25, 2007 at 9:31 pm #

    @franklin: I agree. I have my own gripes with the bury feature too.

    With the newest changes from last week, a lot of less relevant content is hitting the front page. I think the new Digg is simply…awful.

  9. Website Design September 28, 2007 at 9:37 pm #

    “It’s a conspiracy man!” – I think Digg has issues. As with any corporation that’s aquired a lot of money in a relatively short amount of time. But here’s the deal. What is digg for? Reporting news, recent finds, etc. Does it still accomplish that? Rhetorical but yes, it does.

    I think too much focus is put on comments personally. Most are immature and slightly off topic anyway. Also, like there aren’t enough flame wars online as it is.

    If the site owners of Digg want to update, than by all means, let them update. It really doesn’t effect us as users all that much because it’s still functional.