Sign up right now for email updates and get two free ebooks:

Digg Users STILL Being Paid To Game the System

Digg reckons their algorithms can spot paid-to-Digg patterns. Looks like they can’t. Annalee Newitz has successfully paid a company to Digg her blog, read about it over at Wired

I can tell you exactly how a pointless blog full of poorly written, incoherent commentary made it to the front page on Digg. I paid people to do it. What’s more, my bought votes lured honest Diggers to vote for it too. All told, I wound up with a “popular” story that earned 124 diggs — more than half of them unpaid. I also had 29 (unpaid) comments, 12 of which were positive.

Whenever there is a beneficial system someone will work out how to game it for money. I’m sure Digg is getting unfairly singled out also, people must be gaming del.icio.us, Reddit, Stumble’, etc.

The main part that interests me isn’t so much people are being paid to Digg (shock horror), more that the sheeple instinct is so strong that people who were not paid voted the intentionally bad site up. Quite an insight into human nature, eh?

Via:Threadwatch.org

Sign up right now for email updates and get these
two free ebooks

"Creating Killer
Flagship Content"

"Authority Alliances"

Just enter your primary email address in the form below and hit the button!

Before commenting, please read my Comments Policy - thanks!

Comments

  1. I’m not sure where Digg is going these days. I kept expecting stories to reach a certain number of Diggs and then get auto-buried because of gaming fears. Is it not possible that a group of people who digg up similar articles will continue doing so?

    If eveyone on your road starts buying Ford cars does that mean Ford is gaming your road? Could it be that the people on the road like the product?

    What happened to the social in social media? I’m submitting far less stuff to digg these days. I’d rather not be labeled a spammer because (oh no) all of my submissions are about the same basic thing!

  2. I’m not sure where Digg is going these days. I kept expecting stories to reach a certain number of Diggs and then get auto-buried because of gaming fears. Is it not possible that a group of people who digg up similar articles will continue doing so?

    If eveyone on your road starts buying Ford cars does that mean Ford is gaming your road? Could it be that the people on the road like the product?

    What happened to the social in social media? I’m submitting far less stuff to digg these days. I’d rather not be labeled a spammer because (oh no) all of my submissions are about the same basic thing!

  3. Wow that is just amazing, not only that Annalee Newitz paid someone and still got to the top, but that people actually went there and still made positive comments.

  4. Wow that is just amazing, not only that Annalee Newitz paid someone and still got to the top, but that people actually went there and still made positive comments.

  5. James – Why shouldn’t they leave positive comments? We are all different and have different point of view. Thats what makes life interesting. Just because one person thinks a story is of no interest, it doesn’t mean everyone must think the same way. Sometimes, really good stories get no diggs and sometimes garbage catches peoples’ interest.

    If people are being paid to digg, it should be discouraged and the system (digg) should work to detect and make it not worthwhile.

    Several NewsBlaze.com stories did well in digg. I add very few, most were added by others. If stories are of interest, people digg them. If not, then they don’t.

    People know a good story when they see one and they know garbage when they see it. That’s the beauty of social interaction. Diggers can spot crap and they can help bury it. They can also ignore interesting stuff – I’ve been amazed that some really good stores got zero attention.

  6. James – Why shouldn’t they leave positive comments? We are all different and have different point of view. Thats what makes life interesting. Just because one person thinks a story is of no interest, it doesn’t mean everyone must think the same way. Sometimes, really good stories get no diggs and sometimes garbage catches peoples’ interest.

    If people are being paid to digg, it should be discouraged and the system (digg) should work to detect and make it not worthwhile.

    Several NewsBlaze.com stories did well in digg. I add very few, most were added by others. If stories are of interest, people digg them. If not, then they don’t.

    People know a good story when they see one and they know garbage when they see it. That’s the beauty of social interaction. Diggers can spot crap and they can help bury it. They can also ignore interesting stuff – I’ve been amazed that some really good stores got zero attention.