Digg is banning users because they digg too often

This is just bull crap, can you guy reddit it?

http://www.seopedia.org/seo-news/digg-and-memes/digg-is-banning-users-because-they-digg-too-often/

 

if the guy is clicking digg one after the other without reading the story he's changing the levels un-naturally there is nothing wrong with warning him about it.

Why vote for a story if you don't even know what it's about?

 

Thanks for the headsup. Gotta stop digging my stuff so much.

 

I am too mind here...

After all some of us are actually spamming Digg and this could be our counteraction if we were the owners
Thanks for the thumbs up anyways..

I guess we need to be careful

 

i hope other bookmark networks don't follow the same after digg. i myself haven't used digg yet though

 

For me, at nice title + description is enough for a digg. Also, something i just don't want to go back to digg and digg it so i do it in advance

 

hmm interesting read...one shud be careful!

 

Digg really suc*s. All what they achive is loosing pottential visitors.

 

Actually, Digg never accounted for anyone's adivice up until now ..

They only time when Digg listened to it's users, was with that HD code story, when they actually couldn't run the site anymore ...

 

That makes sense to me and I see nothing wrong with it in the slightest. Look down in the BST here and count the social bookmarking sites. That shows some things are simply unnatural, and I applaud them for cracking down on such things. If I actually used Digg, I'd expect the top stories to actually be naturally dugg by people that actually read the stories.

Automated system, mass diggs, digg trades, and the like, should all be filtered out (granted, I'm a hypocrite, and follow along with the social bookmarking threads here at DP, but that's a different topic )

 

@Qryztufre. Now we know who the dig spy over here is!

 

Who? *looks around nervously, while innocently whistling* Heh, I have two digs total, one is the article in the OP, the other is something I actually found interesting. I also have two stumble threads, and have posted in several others (yeah, I know there is a huge difference, but *shrug*).

I actually dislike Digg, as they do not offer adequate tags for my niche and interests (unless you count weird news or whatever). I'd not help them one way or another, but I can certainly applaud them for trying to keep their stats/diggs organic. I'd likely be doing the same thing if I were them.

 

That sounds harsh. The username they banned for "too many diggs" was an old user in there, about two years old. A warning would have been in place. Instead, they set up a direct ban.

 

That would seem like the prudent thing to do... though I wonder if a warning was given and we are only getting half the story. I would like to hear the other side to see what they are saying/thinking.

Either way though, I'm assuming we are not getting the full story here.

 

I followed the story on another blog
The user didn't receive any first warning about it. He got banned, contacted them and was replied the "too many diggs" reason.
After 12 hours, his account was reinstated, but I wonder under what conditions.

 

It happened to one of the members in the Digg discussion as well. He said he "promised to read the full article" in the future...which I guess means if he get's flagged again it'll be good bye forever.

I think if they are not giving warnings first, then shame on them.

I also think that if you are against such actions, then you should likely digg every article you can find on it. If we all dugg them, they'd make it to page one, and others would find it, and digg it...and maybe warnings would start getting issued *shrug* One man can make a difference...assuming there are thousands of them

 

Good point.
Are you familiar to the HD-DVD fiasco on Digg? =)
Now that was a story.

 

They banned my account and my blog ..... There was nothing suspicios.. Just "Dugg" my own items after I posted them...

:-(

 

Yes, which is the exact reason I suggested the articles be dugg...

And for things like this, a Digg is not enough...you should also stumble the articles. That'll pull in other random potential diggs You should also discuss things like this on forums (like this thread) and then digg and stumble the threads. When the man steps on the little guy, it's the other little peoples responsibility to help out.

However, in this case, I'm still thinking we don't have the full story... like how many Diggs were these guys doing? 100's maybe 1,000's a day...an hour? They certainly had to do enough to set off flags someplace.

 

well, all this can do is to reduce moral of good users.

because, in any case, the ones who are there to make 'fake' diggs dont really care! if they get banned.. they open another account and keep doing what they were doing. At the end of the day, this affects on the mass which actually is NOT there for fake diggs.

looks like a point of view? hu?