philcrissman.com

Here’s some more noise about the impending doom of social bookmarking gone bad.

I’ve reiterated my dissatisfaction with digg many times, so no need to go through that again; I’m not surprised to see a post like this, since I found it hard to believe that I could be the only one growing annoyed by the way digg was getting on. Even Paul Stamatiou, who owes a great deal of his traffic to interest generated by digg (not that his articles weren’t good — they were; but to get traffic, the articles need to be noticed, which is where digg played a part), has linked to the above article, and is basically in agreement — though Paul is optimistic that digg could be restored. I’m not so optimistic, but heck — if it became a site worth visiting, I’d consider revisiting it again. Until then, it’s not in my bookmarks or my RSS feed.

Ronald also points to newsvine, which he considers a worthy supplanter of the place digg held. It’s still in beta, so I’ll need to wait for an invite ( :-D update: thanks to everyone who has invited me, you’re all great; got one) before I can learn more about it, but it sounds interesting.

Between Slashdot, reddit, and del.icio.us, I actually don’t feel any void left behind by ignoring digg.com. Digg was an interesting idea, but it displays the one, well-known, weakness of democracy: the value of the results depends on who’s voting, and who’s running for office (analogously, who’s digging stories, and who’s submitting them).