Jay Adelson and Kevin Rose joined the chat.
LONG STORY SHORT:
They denied autoburies, claim that banned users deserve it and that the algorithm changes are for the best of the community.
We can take all that on faith. What we cannot accept is a lack of communication.
That is exactly why this blog started. We need a forum to address our concerns so they can answer them without having to go through mini-revolts.
The agreed and we are going to give them a month to set up this mode of communication.
Check out The Drill Down for an edited version of the conversation.
This does prove, however, that Kevin and Jay recognize the importance of the active users. Digg is about the community. Without us the site is nothing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
And by "us" you mean your little elite group? not everyone is with you, guys... if you go, others will step in. That's the beauty of the internet.
My take...
If you're upset with Digg owners, before you move somewhere else, you should look at WHO owns whatever place you may consider, not how pretty the site is or cool the users are.
From that perspective, this is my quick analysis, based solely on my own opinion:
Propeller: Do you think I'm going to trust AOL? They've already killed Netscape! Enough said.
Reddit: I just don't quite trust CondeNast (the owners of Reddit) but compared to AOL, I'd pick these guys any time. Still, a big company is a big company. Users are just an asset to be used for the bigger goal of profitability. Yet, so far, Reddit has been faring quite well under CN's arms, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
Mixx: Mixx is run by Chris McGill, an ex-Yahoo exec. If you think Kevin Rose is evil, he is NOTHING compared to Mr.McGill. Kevin's a geek who's learning things the hard way. McGill is a "seasoned" executive who is simply playing the "cool" role he knows he has to play now, and newbies are buying it. If this guy was in front of Digg right now, he'll focus on PROFITABILITY and SELLING the damn thing, and will give a rat's ass about the users, much MUCH less than Kevin or Ray. I'd rather a geek than a suit.
Not much left... My suggestion is that if the Digg issue is not resolved, some top diggers should create a Pligg-based site - whatever your opinion of Pligg may be. Now, since building a platform with Pligg that supports the load may be hard at first (and it costs money), I would suggest to start by creating a coRank site - they have the platform already in place - under your own domain (call it revoltnation.com or whatever), and if the site kicks in and can be self-supported, eventually move it out of coRank to a self-hosted Pligg-based site (or whatever software becomes available at the time). Since the domain would be the same, the jump won't imply telling users "hey we were there but now we're here".
Personally that would be the best option IMHO, and you should add an option under the "other social news sites" that says "build our own". Why give candy to someone else who may stick it to you anyways when the time comes? I'd trust any of the top diggers any day before any big company or "seasoned executive". Social news at its best. Built by/for us. Think about it.
Here you can find everything you need to know about the candidates running in the 2008 election.You can even vote your favorite http://presidentofamerica.blogspot.com/
Sharing links for links sake is dead and buried. Where digg started is great, but whats the point in sharing links with such a niche crowd? Only people who understand social networking sites get to reap the fruits of your labour. Why not increase output to television?
Current.com is tackling all of the issues you have laid out, and as well as that it has the unique selling point of having a TV channel. Current want a “two screen experience” which basically means they are trying to get internet news on TV and visa vesa, breaking down the barriers between media formats.
If you want to link share to a decent audience and have the serious output potential available with television then it’s a no brainer. Current.com is a sure fired winner, they have a TV station, no-one else does.
There’s only one logical place to go to.
http://www.current.com
Ultimately, the ownership model that makes the most sense for user-powered sites, I think, is a ownership-by-users model, e.g. a cooperative. If the site is owned by just a few people, there's always going to be a significant chance of them selling out, being evil, etc.
As a professional web developer with a bent toward open source and community driven sites, I would be willing to take on the job of setting up a site for an organization formed as a trust of it's current users. The same idea as co-op housing, but a co-op website.
It seems you guys are down on the lack of transparency. Have you heard of Plime.com? It shows all deleted stories, a users' karma and is editable by anyone as well, wiki-style. It seems to address the complaints you guys all have.
current.com would love any diggers looking for a new home...
@avi - Plime is all fun and games until some users decide to bury all your stories and then you can't log in anymore. If you want to complain about it, there is not one email address you can send your complaint to.
A better example of that would be Propeller.com. Full transparency, modders that own up to their decisions and an open conversation. Too bad it crashes my browser and I can't access it anymore.
Kevin is just waiting for a chance to sell Digg to Fox. That's it!
I mostly use presscue for news, and reddit for Internet detritus, and Slashdot for tech news.
Um, I left a comment asking people to stop promoting their own sites, suggesting something that has already been suggested (top diggers should start a site created/ran by the community) and my comment gets deleted. Then on another post, someone writes "Fuck the Digg top diggers!!!" and that comment stays.
Wow.... Really wow. Ok then, anyone with a Pligg site should come here now and let us all know they're the best next alternative to Digg? I don't get it. I hope someone could clarify.
See? You're asking Digg to COMMUNICATE with the users. You build this blog, we write what we think, and it's fair that now I request that you COMMUNICATE with us, and hopefully explain why my comment got deleted.
If not, then - and I hope you don't delete this comment - you may want to ask yourselves first: wow, we're asking Kevin and Ray to do for a community of millions something even we cannot do for a handful of commenters.
Think about it, and er, I'd love to hear what you think.
As expected, no answer. Funny... Those who cry for communication and transparency completely ignore those who, somewhat followed them.
You're saying things like "let's hope they follow through"... Do YOU follow through with the people who support your protest?
I at least just lost faith on you guys and I start to think you're just a joke... The sad part is that just yesterday I looked up to you. Maybe you really should stop using Digg. That's what people do: don't like a site, move on. Get real... I also hope Digg sells out really soon so you no longer have a Kevin or Ray to cry on.
Sorry Anonymous -- I wasn't checking comments and didn't see your request for some time.
The only comment that was deleted was done so because it personally attached people. Other than that - I'm not moderating the comments at all.
So: Unless you personally attack people - I am fine with whatever comments/criticism people come up with.
I only remember deleting one comment though, which def. needed to be done. If i accidentally deleted yours too, I apologies, that was not the intent.
Post a Comment