The truth about Digg’s bury brigade
I discovered something this morning about the so-called "bury brigades"
I bury lots of crap that I find on Digg, when I still bother to go there but, this very morning, I was up early and I had Digg Spy loaded up.
What I saw was not a case of mass burying of certain sites though, it was far worse.
I was paying attention to the gaming area of Digg and I noticed something. Certain websites that are always on Digg's home page (in the gaming area) would have an article submitted and then, every other article on the same subject would start being buried. It did not matter which article came first.
This is clearly a case of Digg being gamed by selective use of the bury system and it is something Digg should take care of. They already watch for selective Digging, why don't they watch for selective burying?
Get with the program Digg. It is far easier to game Digg via the bury system than it is via the digg system.
I already know that anything submitted to Digg from my blog will be buried within minutes, though I don't see the buries on Digg Spy (I wonder why that is). Regardless of the state of my blog in the world of buries I feel this is a very important issue for Digg to look at. With the ability to drive tremendous amounts of traffic all over the web Digg needs to insure it is not being gamed, on either end.
Good point Steve. What’s this DiggSpy? I hadn’t heard of it before.
Digg Spy allows you to see Digg activity in a slightly time delayed format. You can see Diggs, buries (not who but why), new comments and new stories.
The fact that I saw an article posted about something and then saw a ton of articles on the same subject buried leads me to believe that the bury side of Digg is being gamed even worse than the Digg side of Digg.
Very insightful, that said .. Digg still have a long way to go in fighting spam.
Steve, you were saying your site will get 10 bury whenever any stories from your site got submitted?
Digg just keeps sounding worse. I am glad I’m not a digger or whatever they call ‘em. Your posts on the (get ready to groan) indiggnities that are done at digg (give it up for alliteration!) give me appalled amusement.
You should stick with Netscape and possibly iVillage as those places are for more inline with your content.
iVillage? Huh. I’ve never really visited that site because I think of it as online Glamour magazine but maybe not as frivolous.
I just checked out there site. Some headings I saw were:
-Give him a hand
-Lap-dance tips
-Talk dirty to him!
-5 ego boosts he needs
-Why guys lose interest
-4 ways to hook him
hahahaha!!!
I can see it now: “5 Good Reasons To Remain Single”
ugh. “their site”!
Why wife reads the blogs on there, some are quite witty.
Steve, I’ve seen what you’ve seen. It’s horrible to watch. I can’t believe the administrators at Digg are too stupid to see it for themselves.
iVillage? I never heard of it. No problem though… I don’t submit anything to those sites anymore (although some other people feel compelled to do it for me).
I guess that’s another way to promote your story. Bury all the neighbors.
I hardly visit Digg anymore (I do get news from them via feeds though).
[...] has what many users have come to call the “bury brigade“. This discussion has come up time and time again. It’s also no secret that the bury feature is arguably one of the biggest [...]
Another reason Digg might be having problems? Seems the “Diggers†don’t have as much authority on Digg as one might think. Update: http://forthardknox.com/?p=236
[...] of the “Bury Brigade,” as they are known (see a few anecdotal refs here, here and here) for their efforts to bury all Ron Paul related stories bearing a positive [...]