Digg Not as Incestuous as Previously Suspected?

Is the popular, people-powered news site getting more democratic? A story about finding out who's been spamming you via a Gmail trick has reached the frontpage of Digg with 1836 diggs at the moment. Longtime readers may remember a similar post on Digital Alchemy that got massively dugg about two months ago (which, oddly, seems to be missing on Digg). So, although one blogger has accused Digg users of being dumber than goldfish (and gotten 1487 diggs for it) for repeatedly digging old stories, I think it's actually a positive thing that redundant stories get digged to the frontpage periodically.

It demonstrates that the Digg genepool is a lot less stagnant than it's been accused of being with top Digg users deciding which stories make it and which don't. Presumably, top users get that way by obsessively keeping track of what's been dugg so they shouldn't make the mistake of digging an old story. Is their influence waning? Have they been lured away by Netscape's $12,000 annual pay package for Netscape Navigators? Certainly, recent algorithm changes may have helped usher in a more even playing (digging?) field.

More importantly, not everyone is working with the same information set so old news for one person is entirely new for another.

Labels: Technology

Send to a Friend!       Subscribe!      

       

Digg Not as Incestuous as Previously Suspected?