Finally Proof That The Digg Bury Brigade (aka Digg Mafia) Does Exist


For a long time there has been indirect evidence that there is a group of Digg users who deliberately bury posts from sites that they don’t like or doesn’t match their ideology, and particularly posts from blogs. Well, finally there is proof thanks to Pronet advertising, who used Digg’s own Diggspy tool to track who is burying posts.

The digg bury mechanism is designed to allow users to stop poor on inaccurate submissions from hitting the homepage. Digg doesn’t display who has buried a post or even how many times a post has been buried, even though it does show who has dugg each post. According to Jason Calacanis this was so that Digg staff could bury posts without anyone knowing:

This was done in the early days, from what I was told from insiders, so that the staff of digg could kill stories they didn’t like and blame it on the will of the community. This kept the digg staff’s fingerprints off of things that were killed so the staff of digg could say “we didn’t kill it, the community did.”

Pronet Advertising managed to prove that there is a group of digg users who are working together to bury posts by writing a script that worked on top of Digg Spy to reveal previously hidden information of who was burying which posts.

Digg Spy Evidence

By looking at the data that they managed to obtain before Digg shut down access, they were able get conclusive proof that not only does the bury brigade exist, but it is hard at work burying any content that doesn’t suit its ideology. Some examples were given of posts about Microsoft and Sony being buried by the Digg Brigade:

  • Burying Sony
    • undefined burried Sony slashes prices on Blu-ray player (Spam)
    • adm58 burried Sony slashes prices on Blu-ray player (Spam)
    • glenjammin burried PS3 price is right: Sony Australia – Or Sony Ripoff (Spam)
  • Burying Microsoft
    • xoineg burried 3d Photo Viewer by Microsoft (Inaccurate)
    • phinnfort burried 3d Photo Viewer by Microsoft (Spam)
    • adm58 burried How to resize a partition in Windows Vista (Spam)

Not surprisingly once this story got submitted to Digg, not only did it get buried, but the user who submitted the story even had their account deleted by Digg.

The Digg Brigade have also been working hard to bury stories from the many domains (mainly blogs) like my own that recently have had the bans that were incorrectly applied to their sites ‘lifted’. I’ve been monitoring submissions from these sites and my own, and in almost all cases any submissions have been buried within an hour. For instance I can almost guarantee you that if this post gets submitted it will be buried within an hour.  Update: It was buried within 5 minutes!
In my view the only way submissions can get buried this quickly is if a group of users are looking out for posts from those sites. It’s surely only a matter of time before these sites get banned again thanks to efforts of the Digg Brigade.

I just can’t understand why Digg can’t just play fair. Fine, I understand the need to keep its promotion algorithm secret (although I don’t really see what more you can add on top of the basic concept of the more diggs you get, the greater the chances are of getting onto the homepage….). But, why do they continue to allow a small band of users to police the site? I’m all for allowing users to moderate posts, but only if the post is genuinely poor or inaccurate.

More: Pronet Advertising


Read Related Posts




Latest Posts

Filed Under: BloggingInternet News

Tags:

About the Author: Everton is based in London and has worked in the internet and mobile space for over ten years now, and before that worked in corporate strategy and consulting. He has a degree in Economics from Cambridge University.He also writes for Windows 7 News, Windows 8 News and One Tip A Day.

  • The reason digg won't do anything about the digg brigade was because I don't think they can.

    Maybe it is not monetarily or technically feasible, or maybe it is just something else...
  • no, I think the reason why digg won't do anything is because they are unofficially supported and as Jason said, some digg staffers are members
  • Ajay they could very well do something against this. Ban accounts of users who dump articles, ban IPs, make it harder for articles to get dumped, restrict the amount of dumps per day aso.

    They are not doing enough to stop it, this is clear.
  • You're right about that Everton and Martin, but there is without doubt a lot of underhand and unethical things happening at Digg.

    And, have you realized that all this negative popularity is bringing in its pageviews and money as well?
  • And, have you realized that all this negative popularity is bringing in its pageviews and money as well?


    Based on those traffic charts you posted and the number of diggs homepage articles seem to be getting these days which seems to be falling, I'm not so sure about that Ajay.
  • Yeah Ajay, Digg has a bunch of young dude who go burying just about any post which they disagree..
  • I submitted the story to digg, and it was buried within 5 mins!!!
  • I submitted the story to digg, and it was buried within 5 mins!!!


    I decided to keep an eye on the submission as soon as I got the alert and it was indeed buried in 5 mins. The only way a post could get buried that fast is if the digg admin team did it.

    I can't see how digg can continue being so heavy-handed in their approach. Together with the Digg Bury Brigade they will eventually drive lots of users away
  • digg must be having a good filter system ... any post against "kevin rose" or "digg" must monitored and buried.
  • Roger
    Hi,

    Great post, not surprising in view of my experience 2 weeks ago.

    I was also one of the commenters on Digg at the time of ‘growth’ of Ajay's article "Why the Digg Mafia will cost Kevin Rose Millions". That got buried in about 30 hits although still kept on attracting votes - currently sitting at 330 - even as buried. Automatic, systematic burying of individual comments (all were in agreement of the article) was rampant. On every comment, and in seconds. I posted a subsequent article (True Loyalty & Death of Digg). Technically, it is still there somewhere in the annals of Digg - has not been buried as far as I can see. However, that is as good as dead - no one can see it without clicking the URL. Digg banned me almost soon after it started gaining ground, which it was doing fast.

    In a way, I am glad it’s happened - helps me get distance from Digg. Thanks for giving me a platform to air my experience.
blog comments powered by Disqus