<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Digg &#8212; worthless, or just misunderstood?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 13:01:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Is Digg Just Misunderstood</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/comment-page-1/#comment-101582</link>
		<dc:creator>Is Digg Just Misunderstood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/#comment-101582</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-ref-pre%--&gt;[...] Maybe it&#039;s just meant to be &quot;Digg-bait&quot; (as Nick Denton at Valleywag likes to call it), but Jason Clarke of Download Squad has a long post up about Digg and how it is destined for failure.   As Jason mentions in the post, Download Squad is part of AOL, which owns the revamped Netscape - a site that was essentially modeled on Digg - so perhaps it&#039;s an elaborate corporate hit-job. I thought Download Squad was all about cool software, but maybe I was wrong. In any case, Jason&#039;s criticisms are not really all that new. As far as I can tell, his two main points are: 1) Digg&#039;s audience is full of mouth-breathers and low-foreheads who just pile on and flame each other, and digg down things they don&#039;t agree with. And 2) Digg&#039;s traffic, a kind of &quot;flash crowd&quot; that can shut down even the most robust hosting service in a matter of minutes, consists of window-shoppers who come quickly and leave quickly, and if they sign up for something they never actually use it. Jason says that the Digg community is &quot;rotting from the inside out,&quot; and that &quot;the sheer level of superiority, sarcasm, and general negativity is overwhelming.&quot; As with many other critics of the Digg model, or social media in general - including Nick Carr and Andrew Keen, as well as newcomers Andy Rutledge, who I&#039;ve written about here, and Lee Gomes of the Wall Street Journal, who I&#039;ve written about here - the argument is that the wisdom of crowds doesn&#039;t exist. The problem with the whole concept of taking advantage of the &quot;wisdom of crowds&quot; is that crowds have no wisdom. Microsoft Windows is an example of an operating system written using the wisdom of crowds… and don&#039;t get me started on the majority of large open-source efforts.As a commenter rightly points out, the Windows crack is a gigantic red herring. Any problems at Microsoft have little or nothing to do with the wisdom of crowds, and everything to do with corporate hierarchy and centralized decision-making. If anything, they could use a little more Digging. And as for the traffic problems, it&#039;s true that Diggers flood in and then disappear, leading some to wonder how much value they actually bring with them. But couldn&#039;t we say that about Web traffic from plenty of other sources too, like TechCrunch for example? In conclusion, Jason says: Social media sites are an unproven phenomenon… I predict that in the near future sites will start to attempt to block digg as a referrer, since getting a link from digg will simply cost them money. And over time I believe users will tire of the constant negativity that characterizes digg… unless digg can find a way to clean up their collective act. Does Digg have flaws? Sure it does. And so do plenty of other social media sites. But I think Jason (for whatever reason) is being way too negative. What do you think? Comments Tag: Digg, Social Media Add to  Del.icio.us &#124;  Digg &#124;  Yahoo! My Web &#124;  Furl Bookmark WebProNews: View All Articles by Mathew Ingram   Receive Our Daily Email of Breaking eBusiness News    About the Author:  Mathew Ingram [note only one &quot;t&quot; in Mathew] is a technology writer and blogger for the Globe and Mail, a national newspaper based in Toronto, and also writes about the Web and media at www.mathewingram.com/work and www.mathewingram.com/media.   WebProNews RSS Feed More Blog Talk Articles  Contact WebProNews [...]&lt;!--%kramer-ref-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Maybe it&#8217;s just meant to be &#8220;Digg-bait&#8221; (as Nick Denton at Valleywag likes to call it), but Jason Clarke of Download Squad has a long post up about Digg and how it is destined for failure.   As Jason mentions in the post, Download Squad is part of AOL, which owns the revamped Netscape &#8211; a site that was essentially modeled on Digg &#8211; so perhaps it&#8217;s an elaborate corporate hit-job. I thought Download Squad was all about cool software, but maybe I was wrong. In any case, Jason&#8217;s criticisms are not really all that new. As far as I can tell, his two main points are: 1) Digg&#8217;s audience is full of mouth-breathers and low-foreheads who just pile on and flame each other, and digg down things they don&#8217;t agree with. And 2) Digg&#8217;s traffic, a kind of &#8220;flash crowd&#8221; that can shut down even the most robust hosting service in a matter of minutes, consists of window-shoppers who come quickly and leave quickly, and if they sign up for something they never actually use it. Jason says that the Digg community is &#8220;rotting from the inside out,&#8221; and that &#8220;the sheer level of superiority, sarcasm, and general negativity is overwhelming.&#8221; As with many other critics of the Digg model, or social media in general &#8211; including Nick Carr and Andrew Keen, as well as newcomers Andy Rutledge, who I&#8217;ve written about here, and Lee Gomes of the Wall Street Journal, who I&#8217;ve written about here &#8211; the argument is that the wisdom of crowds doesn&#8217;t exist. The problem with the whole concept of taking advantage of the &#8220;wisdom of crowds&#8221; is that crowds have no wisdom. Microsoft Windows is an example of an operating system written using the wisdom of crowds… and don&#8217;t get me started on the majority of large open-source efforts.As a commenter rightly points out, the Windows crack is a gigantic red herring. Any problems at Microsoft have little or nothing to do with the wisdom of crowds, and everything to do with corporate hierarchy and centralized decision-making. If anything, they could use a little more Digging. And as for the traffic problems, it&#8217;s true that Diggers flood in and then disappear, leading some to wonder how much value they actually bring with them. But couldn&#8217;t we say that about Web traffic from plenty of other sources too, like TechCrunch for example? In conclusion, Jason says: Social media sites are an unproven phenomenon… I predict that in the near future sites will start to attempt to block digg as a referrer, since getting a link from digg will simply cost them money. And over time I believe users will tire of the constant negativity that characterizes digg… unless digg can find a way to clean up their collective act. Does Digg have flaws? Sure it does. And so do plenty of other social media sites. But I think Jason (for whatever reason) is being way too negative. What do you think? Comments Tag: Digg, Social Media Add to  <a href="http://Del.icio.us" title="http://Del.icio.us" target="_blank">Del.icio.us</a> |  Digg |  Yahoo! My Web |  Furl Bookmark WebProNews: View All Articles by Mathew Ingram   Receive Our Daily Email of Breaking eBusiness News    About the Author:  Mathew Ingram [note only one "t" in Mathew] is a technology writer and blogger for the Globe and Mail, a national newspaper based in Toronto, and also writes about the Web and media at <a href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work" rel="nofollow">http://www.mathewingram.com/work</a> and <a href="http://www.mathewingram.com/media" rel="nofollow">http://www.mathewingram.com/media</a>.   WebProNews RSS Feed More Blog Talk Articles  Contact WebProNews [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guy&#8217;s back &#8212; and he needs YOUR help! &#171; Marketing Nirvana &#8212; by Mario Sundar</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/comment-page-1/#comment-101540</link>
		<dc:creator>Guy&#8217;s back &#8212; and he needs YOUR help! &#171; Marketing Nirvana &#8212; by Mario Sundar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/#comment-101540</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-ref-pre%--&gt;[...] Close on the heels of Matthew Ingram&#8217;s recent post questioning the &#8220;Wisdom of Crowds&#8220;, Guy decides to put that very wisdom (in question) to action, by summoning the collective minds of today&#8217;s marketers in helping him craft the table of contents for his new book. [...]&lt;!--%kramer-ref-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Close on the heels of Matthew Ingram&#8217;s recent post questioning the &#8220;Wisdom of Crowds&#8220;, Guy decides to put that very wisdom (in question) to action, by summoning the collective minds of today&#8217;s marketers in helping him craft the table of contents for his new book. [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Berlin</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/comment-page-1/#comment-99456</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Berlin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 02:14:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/#comment-99456</guid>
		<description>Digg has its issues and challenges, but from what I can see Mr. Clarke is poking around in the wrong places. 

I personally don&#039;t care for the tone with digg comments some of the time, but does that mean that Digg doesn&#039;t have value or is rotting from the inside? Hardly. I can happily enjoy digg&#039;s content without bothering with the comments if I like, or use its best-of-breed tools to help filter out the din. And the notion that sites will block digg as a referrer is ridiculous. Some traffic is better than others, but traffic is still traffic -- everybody loves it. 

In my view digg&#039;s (and all social news sites&#039;) biggest challenge is the value of diggs/votes themselves. Should all votes be equal, how do you encourage participation while discouraging gaming, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Digg has its issues and challenges, but from what I can see Mr. Clarke is poking around in the wrong places. </p>
<p>I personally don&#8217;t care for the tone with digg comments some of the time, but does that mean that Digg doesn&#8217;t have value or is rotting from the inside? Hardly. I can happily enjoy digg&#8217;s content without bothering with the comments if I like, or use its best-of-breed tools to help filter out the din. And the notion that sites will block digg as a referrer is ridiculous. Some traffic is better than others, but traffic is still traffic &#8212; everybody loves it. </p>
<p>In my view digg&#8217;s (and all social news sites&#8217;) biggest challenge is the value of diggs/votes themselves. Should all votes be equal, how do you encourage participation while discouraging gaming, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathew Ingram</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/comment-page-1/#comment-99373</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathew Ingram</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 01:09:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/#comment-99373</guid>
		<description>Thanks for that, Engtech.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for that, Engtech.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: engtech</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/comment-page-1/#comment-99314</link>
		<dc:creator>engtech</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2006 23:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/12/11/digg-worthless-or-just-misunderstood/#comment-99314</guid>
		<description>Yup, it&#039;s all about finding good filters. Is Digg a good filter? Not really. Is Digg a good source of traffic? Yes and no. I find that both Digg and Slashdot can bring in a swarm of commenters who are there for a flamewar more than anything else. The only time I didn&#039;t get a bad taste from comments was that Great Firewall of Canada post. Maybe it&#039;s me. :)

The traffic is great, and blog links that come afterwards are great... but maybe it&#039;s a good idea to turn comments off for the initial part of the flood. I find the later commenters are much more respectful than the initial wave.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yup, it&#8217;s all about finding good filters. Is Digg a good filter? Not really. Is Digg a good source of traffic? Yes and no. I find that both Digg and Slashdot can bring in a swarm of commenters who are there for a flamewar more than anything else. The only time I didn&#8217;t get a bad taste from comments was that Great Firewall of Canada post. Maybe it&#8217;s me. :)</p>
<p>The traffic is great, and blog links that come afterwards are great&#8230; but maybe it&#8217;s a good idea to turn comments off for the initial part of the flood. I find the later commenters are much more respectful than the initial wave.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

