Digg say "don't talk about digg"

I like your approach.

 

I don't "dig" digg. What is the point of it? I mean you get a story published on the homepage if your lucky, and yes it drives traffic to your website, but is this traffic going to increase sales or increase your income. Very unlikely - the only thing you'll come out with is a bill for the extra bandwith your story created.

 

I agree, i think digg has dugg its own grave now anyway.

 

add me "Sorry - bad IP address" http://digg.com/users/serverunion

Doesn't really bother me, as I didn't seemed to get any traffic from the few posts I made. Think I may have posted on the DP thread, most likely why.

 

sorry for the double post, remembered this thread about the broke a55 digg owner: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=121689

 

Welcome to the party.

 

This is what I told digg when they banned all those DP members. Well many of the DP members who got banned are already on techTAGG and they make money through Adsense. I still have room for 100% adsense sharing. So feel free to join and promote you stories. I am working on some more tech related features which will be released soon.

 

Ok, ok i am in.
Just move some traffic from digg to techTAGG.
Think how to do that. Digg is slow, maybe this will be the point.

 

I'm sure Digg doesn't care. They're getting some pretty big media coverage right now

 

You get thousands of natural backlinks in a few days. That is priceless.

 

yah but waste for DP members now who are BANNED

 

For everything else, there's Mastercard.

 

Soo, you cheated, got caught redhanded and now you're whining? Grow up please.

 

Sorry, who cheated?

 

Sound like you work for digg. huh Digg suc*s

 

Ha, no I dont work for digg. And no, my stories aint getting digged either .

 

Why don't you answer the question though...I trust you haven't actually read this thread in its entirety

 

yfs1, I read ~5-7 pages of a couple of threads regarding this issue. It was quite clear that a bunch of you people asked "favours". Not the way digg should be run imho. And apparently not in the opinion of the admins on digg either. They probably banned all people that digged those lame stories (like the blue wonder one, I mean.. it's basicly just a ad for travel..). Ban or not who knows whats right, but its totally in the right of the digg people to ban whoever they feel are abusing the system. And in this matter I kinda think they did the right thing. Lame SEO/affiliate/adsense-spam doesnt belong on digg (or dmoz, or google or anywhere except perhaps your own intranet if you're soo in love with it).

Does that rant satisfy your need for a answer yfs1? I "trust" you'll go to great lengths starting another bitch-whine-session like you're known todo.

 

If google had the same stance as digg they would ban half the sites on the web. It shouldn't matter how a story gets onto digg - if its good it reaches the front page otherwise it gets buried.

How many of the people who asked for diggs actually hit the front page? Very few.

 

*cough* ipconfig /release *cough*

IMO, the best way to take care of "bad" articles on Digg is for them to implement a system where fellow diggers can vote to kill the article permanently if the article is less than a day old. Bury may not be sufficient. Banning for this kind of stuff is not acceptable, IMO.