I compromised my Digg integrity
This post is a little lessoned learned in social networking: A couple of weeks ago, I compromised my Digg integrity. That is, I unwillingly voted for a Digg post after being solicited three times from a colleague of mine (you know who you are, Ace). I did it as a courtesy even though I didn’t “dig” what was being asked of me to Digg. There wasn’t anything wrong with the post, it just wasn’t my cup of tea.
The same thing happens when people you barely know bug you with LinkedIn invitations. I occasionally get an invitation from someone and think to myself: “Dude, I can’t vouch for your work. I don’t even know you.”
The take-away? There’s nothing wrong with asking for a Digg, recommendation, social networking action, or whatever, but ask once and once only. People will act if they appreciate what is being asked. In the case of Digg, put a request out there and only expect people to Digg what they like. That makes the whole process authentic thus enabling the social bookmarking tool, or any voting/recommendation tool for that matter, to work more effectively.
2 Comments
It’s one of the lies about digg. They call it social media/journalism all day long, and they tout the level playing field of the system, but social things (like socialism) fail every time because humans don’t settle for equal.
Some individuals like success, and that includes getting digged a ton, so they find ways to tip the scales in their favor.
People will either lose interest in digging topics when they submit an article 5 days before someone else submits it, or they will find a way to “out digg” someone else. If their is no reward (intrinsic or extrinsic) for an “out digg” then there is no self-interest, no reason, for someone to participate.
Calacanis was very smart to pay the top diggers to join Netscape.
Yeah, people who bug, bug.
I have no real evidence but I suspect much of Digg itself is compromised, and I see this as the biggest threat to Digg’s success. That is, I have a sneaking suspicion that certain people who are submitting to Digg make a submission and then inform 400 colleagues. 50 of them digg the article, which gets it to where it is exposed to more of the Digg community, and simply by the fact that it remains in a high spot for an extended amount of time it gets more Diggs until it breaks the 400+ Digg barrier and becomes one of the “uber-Digged” articles.
However, Digg has also broken 500,000 registered users, which will hopefully dilute some of the ability for articles that are artificially digged to get traction.
However again, when it comes to the political postings on Digg and the comments left in their wake there sure seem to be a lot of left-wingers. It would be nice to see a more balanced crowd using Digg. Maybe the right-wingers are just less likely to post comments, who knows.