http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/134-The-Dirt-on-Suspicious-Digging-at-Digg.com….html

So I’ll take the words you put in my mouth this time and cry “screw you guys, digg can do what they want”

Ha ha, touche! :-)

The thing to remember – worst case scenario, not showing up in Digg for one reason or another isn’t the end of the world. There are other ways to promote your website without being dugg. So I’ll take the words you put in my mouth this time and cry “screw you guys, digg can do what they want”.

It’s the domain’s content and the domain is ultimately responsible for the content.

Any system can be abused especially those systems with hundreds of thousands of users and open membership.

Right. So you’re prepared to cut the digg admins some slack because they have lots of members, but not forum admins?

Edit: I was probably jumping to conclusions with the assumption that Buddha intended his second statement to only apply to digg. Yes, I agree, any system based on a community is open to abuse. We do our best!

It’s the domain’s content and the domain is ultimately responsible for the content.

so… someone could post such a statement in the comments on digg, and it would have to ban itself (obviously a hypothetical as there would be no point to digging digg)? Forums and other user submitted content is inherently different from other types centrally controlled content. Digg should be aware of that more than most, as their whole site is essentially a specialized forum with strict restrictions on content format, but little control over content substance.

I’m of the opinion that if they need to ban sites, it puts the lie to their “non-hierarchical editorial control” that they espouse on their front page. I’m also of the opinion that they would do much more to discourage people seeking reciprocal diggs if they actually punished those people, rather than banning the site they posted on, a move the poster may not even be aware of.

I do see the logic they are using in their current system… ban the site hosting the request, and thus try to get that site to do the police work for them… but it’s ill conceived and will do more to produce a backlash and hurt their own content, especially considering that the people posting the request are likely doing so on a popular and well respected site because, well, that’s where they’re most likely to find other people.

The point of this post, though, was that we shouldn’t have to put all these measures in place because the “wisdom of the crowd” is supposedly reliable enough to filter the good from the crap.

Any system can be abused especially those systems with hundreds of thousands of users and open membership.