« Is Metacafe on the Block? | Main | Talk of TV Networks Creating Their Own YouTube Killer »

December 08, 2006



"This potential for bribery also points up the need for a reliable reputation system so that the audience members can police themselves."

Hey Erick ... not sure if that's the right solution. The only way that audience members could police themselves is if any of them knew *for sure* that others were selling their services on the side.

And without definitive proof, all we'd have is an angry mob with pitchforks and torches.

Actually -- let me correct myself.

Something like that already exists in the "Bury Brigade", in so far as that Digg is the only Social Network that has a "Bury" button.

The Bury button allows Digg to theoretically police itself -- but unfortunately, it can also be used by groups of users to push down certain sites.

The "Bury Brigade" is a pejorative to connatate groups of people who bury down individuals or stories that they believe to be "lame" or "spam" ... for reasons that other people might not similarly believe to be lame.

For example, some groups routinely bury blog submissions because they believe blogs have no role on Digg.

And, unfortuantely, because its linked to an automatic algorithmic "banning" system that doesn't seem to be effectively policed, it can lead to groups with an agenda banning URLs completely.

Anyway, sorry for the long reply -- but some debate needs to be opened up on Digg ... glad you're contributing to it. ;)

t @ dji

Matt Ellsworth

Well thats interesting - I wonder how its still going and if it is still happening.

The comments to this entry are closed.