Digg removed Ron Paul article from front page and "US Elections"!

[FreedomLiberty]

Digg shows again that they are willing to censor and remove stories. This story was on the front page and in the elections category. Now it is not there. Or was it the bury brigade? WTF?!

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Montana_Newspaper_admits_to_deliberately_ignoring_ Ron_Paul

[wstrucke]

happens again and again

[Joe3113]

F#ck those digg c%nts.

Digg is 100% controlled.

[Jae0]

We've got bigger battles to worry about

[dawnbt]

Digg is no longer useful to us! I say everyone cancel your accounts!!! Hit em where it hurts!

[AlbemarleNC0003]

We've got bigger battles to worry about

Yep. Gotta get to canvassing real people who might think this thing is over.

[FreedomLiberty]

It is like it is enough that the Mainstream Media ignores Ron Paul. But then Digg, a supposed "free" and "democratic" news site. :mad::mad::mad:

[blakjak]

Digg doesn't add or remove stories - Digg users do by "digging" and "burying". This has been discussed many times.

[NoPants]

Post it again, this time don't include Ron Paul's name in the title. We've been through this before.

You can title it something like "Newspaper Admits to Censoring Voter Information Leading into Super Tuesday"

[FreedomLiberty]

Maybe the elite have a massive bury brigade with bot accounts that buries all Ron Paul stories and diggs all critical stories of Ron Paul. This bury feature is annoying, Digg maybe added it so stories like this can be removed.

[wstrucke]

there are digg "superusers" who can bury an article with one click. it's super dumb.

[scooter]

I'm sitting next to the guy at work who created the Digg entry. He told me that he posted that to Digg this morning and I started watching it. Immediately after the status on the page changed from "Upcoming" to "Popular" it disappeared from all of the pages.

That doesn't seem like standard "digging" and "burying" to me.

[newmedia4ron]

well I can't blame digg
we spam them
its called "blowback"

[FreedomLiberty]

Digg is clearly not reliable. Reddit is better than Digg. But there are much fewer people on Reddit. :(

[scooter]

well I can't blame digg
we spam them
its called "blowback"

I can go along with this a little bit. While I think this article was actually a good one and wasn't really pushed on the forums enough to get spamming going, there have been those cases in the past.

The RP supporters who used to post up 8 different versions about meaningless Ron Paul topics and digg them all up are the reason why the super users bury our articles so fast.

[Jobarra]

I can go along with this a little bit. While I think this article was actually a good one and wasn't really pushed on the forums enough to get spamming going, there have been those cases in the past.

The RP supporters who used to post up 8 different versions about meaningless Ron Paul topics and digg them all up are the reason why the super users bury our articles so fast.
+1

It's amazing that so many people are blind to this and instead blame the users of DIGG or DIGG itself. I got so tired of seeing 30 seperate blogs being dugg that were all just a link to another article about Dr. Paul that was already dugg that I began to bury them.

BTW, posting an unbroken link further speeds the rate at which the article is buried. But I'm guessing the OP will be like others here and moan about that not having anything to do with it being dugg.

[blakjak]

The RP supporters who post up to 8 different versions about meaningless Ron Paul topics and digg them all up are the reason why the super users bury our articles so fast.

+2

[Tdcci]

Reddit is better than Digg. But there are much fewer people on Reddit. :(

Reddit is a nicer community, but they are a community of programmers, and as soon as Ron Paul articles became popular, they wrote greasemonkey scripts to automatically downmod Ron Paul articles, and hundreds of users (still!) search for ron paul articles just to purge them from the site. The key is not to put Ron, Paul, Dr, Texas, or Constitution or Congressman (without mentioning another name) in the title so they can't recognize the subject of the article without reading it. You will get your legitimate upmods then.

[Tdcci]

well I can't blame digg
we spam them
its called "blowback"

You're buying into the Bury Brigade's propaganda, we did not "spam" them, we dugg Ron Paul articles we liked, and if a Digg moderator (they do exist) autoburies them, they pop up again because naturally, the digg user thinks that if an important story for an important event (like how RP did in Montana) was not in upcoming or available in search without clicking on "search buried stories", surely no one has submitted it yet?

[Joe3113]

DIGG AND FAVORITE (IT RISES FASTER)

Digg censored the other one that had Ron Paul in the title. (The one this thread is about)

I left 'Ron Paul' OUT of the title and description.

SHOUT IT TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS!!!!!


http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Montana_Kaimin_says_We_deliberately_censored_him

[Tdcci]

Your digg tip (and it has been repeated by many for a long time) about not putting Ron or Paul in the title or description is essential to getting anything done on Digg. Should be stickied, maybe if you create another thread without promoting that one story.

[newmedia4ron]

I think we do abuse the system whatever
digg has a very small audience (that is already expose to Ron Paul), flood your local tv station instead
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=31866&page=2

[MrZach]

Digg shows again that they are willing to censor and remove stories. This story was on the front page and in the elections category. Now it is not there. Or was it the bury brigade? WTF?!

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Montana_Newspaper_admits_to_deliberately_ignoring_ Ron_Paul

Yeah, the KnowBeforeYouVote.com website has 1226 Diggs, but you won't see it anywhere in the top Diggs for the last 30 days...

Censorship.

[Jobarra]

You're buying into the Bury Brigade's propaganda, we did not "spam" them, we dugg Ron Paul articles we liked, and if a Digg moderator (they do exist) autoburies them, they pop up again because naturally, the digg user thinks that if an important story for an important event (like how RP did in Montana) was not in upcoming or available in search without clicking on "search buried stories", surely no one has submitted it yet?
You're delusional. I remember specifically looking at 4 pages of 'upcoming' articles at one point and seeing numerous blog entries that only contained a single link to another Ron Paul article that was dugg already. Sounds like ALOT of people just believed their blog to be more important than the actual source. I guess they were trying to drive traffic to their sites about Ron Paul and ended up just further damaging Dr. Paul and themselves. I remember one time looking at 3 pages and seeing the same blog dugg over all three pages. Somebody literally dugg every blog entry in their blog. I promptly buried what I could.

People STILL post diggs of their blog entries that link to another article on here.

[Tdcci]

Blogspam is not exclusive to Ron Paul articles, I see it more prevalent in Barack Obama articles, but everyone tolerates it because he's the HIP NEW THING. Don't forget all those top 10 lists either.

[Jobarra]

Blogspam is not exclusive to Ron Paul articles, I see it more prevalent in Barack Obama articles, but everyone tolerates it because he's the HIP NEW THING. Don't forget all those top 10 lists either.
And you of course bury each one of those right?

[Edu]

Put obama somewhere in the story and it will go up really fast.

I see obama stories go to top status all the time. So you know who the bury people are voting for.

[Ciceros]

I removed my account. Maybe you all should do the same if you have one!

[the_bee]

Digg shows again that they are willing to censor and remove stories. This story was on the front page and in the elections category. Now it is not there. Or was it the bury brigade? WTF?!

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Montana_Newspaper_admits_to_deliberately_ignoring_ Ron_Paul

dugg