Top Digg Stories not Submitted by Digg Kings

Is the majority digging the boring stuff?

 

Statistics

With some analysis and some spreadsheeting, I could prove that no Digg top 10 user did ever submit one of the top 30 stories on Digg (I was tired after 30). (With one exception of story number 12). The average of Submitter's rankings of the Top 10, 15 and 30 stories are 4116, 3793 and 5061 respectively. If you think this is regarding only the special-case-stories, I can tell you that similar statistics apply to the top 10 Digg stories of the current week: No Top 10 user submitted any of them.

Conclusion

What do the "Digg Kings" get onto the homepage? It's always the 1000 diggs stuff. And guess what? Everbody in the comments seems to realize it's about the same bunch topics. Either about Mac, Wii, Digg or Stephen Colbert! :) And that actually makes 70% of diggs homepage content. That should NOT be the case! Getting the same and the same content on Digg is not what's intended by its democracy, nor is it caused by something that I would call "democratic". This is not forming a democracy anymore! When some submitters dominant, it's NOT democratic. Albertpacino, current Digg top user, has promoted more stories than he has commented on ones. Alone he would not duplicate content when submitting, and that's a reason good enough to use his RSS and digg it, but with 10 users with similar browsing behaviours and intentions to submit a lot and get stories on frontpage, Digg's main RSS becomes boring. Combine a lot of stars and you get the same shit the whole time!

Cause

The friendship feature! People have an RSS of someone, they open it and digg before they read, cause they "know he deserves it!". Also, when Kevin Rose posts a comment, a whole population gives it a thumb up like dogs!

Solution

Either disable it or give it a weaker effect. Digg seems to have listened to that call already. I would even suggest more anonymity. I liked the idea of making the submitter anonymus until the story gets promoted and I would even make the diggers of the story anonymus until it's on homepage! Fanboys digg their heros' stories like crazy and always manage to get them on frontpage. Current digg top user has 2318 friends, most of which just obey his stories - and half of which enough to promote them forever. On Digg's democracy, we should digg content and not cheer for our beloved. If Digg's mission is to filter web news by quality using votes, it should avoid creating some editors for some fans. I would love to block these top users, to get creative content, but i'm afraid i would hardly get any news then, while there is some quality news lying there in the queue, not getting promoted. Digg users even started to bury stories they simply don't agree with. This one for example is a big target to be buried by most of fan-readers out there on digg.  We should give everybody a chance to promote their stories, not to be fair, but because their content deserves it. Digg will achieve democracy by eliminating the super powers it gives to some people. Submitting quality content more than once doesn't give you the right to have a better chance of getting promoted next time! What if your next story is about the same thing or is simply not interesting? What if other, normal users have better stories, which could be proven if they had a chance like yours to reach people?

For everybody digging persons rather than stories: What a shame!

For everyone of kevinrose's 20876 friends: Where is your charachter and desicions? In this case you even chose to put that friend because other people chose him.

I love digg and hate its users.