Comments on: Digg is Corrupted http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/ They're on to me... to the Batcave! Wed, 02 Sep 2009 14:13:44 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: glench http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-162 glench Wed, 03 May 2006 03:17:05 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-162 It really doesn't matter at all. People are only upset because they feel they are cheated, when there is no objection about the stories that were promoted. It really doesn’t matter at all. People are only upset because they feel they are cheated, when there is no objection about the stories that were promoted.

]]> By: Zeerus http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-107 Zeerus Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:59:58 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-107 Logan, the chances that this is a fluke are slim to none. There's no doubt Kevin and the Digg staff haven't seen these articles already, and if it were a hacker situation they would have notified the public instead of deleting articles and continuing to not respond to complaints. this is a situation of the Digg staff being irresponsible, not a fluke or hacker situation Logan, the chances that this is a fluke are slim to none. There’s no doubt Kevin and the Digg staff haven’t seen these articles already, and if it were a hacker situation they would have notified the public instead of deleting articles and continuing to not respond to complaints.

this is a situation of the Digg staff being irresponsible, not a fluke or hacker situation

]]> By: Missingo http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-106 Missingo Fri, 21 Apr 2006 01:53:19 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-106 the fact that digg is contradicting themselves is bad... no its and buts about it. does it signify the down fall of Web 2.0? I dont know.... I just know what Digg has done is not fair. the fact that digg is contradicting themselves is bad…
no its and buts about it.
does it signify the down fall of Web 2.0? I dont know….
I just know what Digg has done is not fair.

]]> By: Logan Leger http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-105 Logan Leger Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:22:29 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-105 It matters and then it doesn't. It matters because of the entire philosophy behind Digg. However, this is not the end to Digg or the Web 2.0 craze. Senor, you're taking this too seriously. I highly doubt it is what you are thinking it really is... I seriously doubt this. Sure, the chances are astronomical but what if it was just a fluke? What if it's a hacker and they have no control over it but don't want the public to know? There are a lot of possible scenarios to consider... It matters and then it doesn’t. It matters because of the entire philosophy behind Digg. However, this is not the end to Digg or the Web 2.0 craze. Senor, you’re taking this too seriously. I highly doubt it is what you are thinking it really is… I seriously doubt this. Sure, the chances are astronomical but what if it was just a fluke? What if it’s a hacker and they have no control over it but don’t want the public to know? There are a lot of possible scenarios to consider…

]]> By: Zeerus http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-104 Zeerus Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:23:19 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-104 but Glen, it does matter. If editors are skewing the results then users aren't getting the links they want, they're getting biased information. For example say I post some superhuge mega article, and then somebody says, wow, the front page worthy, so they copy it to their website and then post it as their own story. All of a sudden all of their sockpuppet accounts and friends digg the duplicate story instead of the original, and all of those thousands of hits go straight to the copycat instead of the source. it's just plain unfair. but Glen, it does matter. If editors are skewing the results then users aren’t getting the links they want, they’re getting biased information. For example say I post some superhuge mega article, and then somebody says, wow, the front page worthy, so they copy it to their website and then post it as their own story. All of a sudden all of their sockpuppet accounts and friends digg the duplicate story instead of the original, and all of those thousands of hits go straight to the copycat instead of the source.

it’s just plain unfair.

]]> By: Glen C. http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-103 Glen C. Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:19:57 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-103 Even if editors are skewing the results, does it really even matter? I doubt anyone cares that much if the results are off a little bit. This hardly signifies the downfall of Digg or "Web 2.0" -- whatever that is. Even if editors are skewing the results, does it really even matter? I doubt anyone cares that much if the results are off a little bit. This hardly signifies the downfall of Digg or “Web 2.0″ — whatever that is.

]]> By: Zeerus http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-102 Zeerus Thu, 20 Apr 2006 18:28:57 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-102 I think it may in this case. Digg is at the front of web 2.0, so a downfall wouldn't be good right about now I think it may in this case. Digg is at the front of web 2.0, so a downfall wouldn’t be good right about now

]]> By: J. Angelo Racoma http://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-101 J. Angelo Racoma Thu, 20 Apr 2006 18:22:38 +0000 https://zeerus.wordpress.com/2006/04/20/digg-is-corrupted/#comment-101 Does this signal the downfall of Web 2.0?!? Does this signal the downfall of Web 2.0?!?

]]>