We Need To Buy Dugg.com

[Myerz]

Let's buy DUGG.com....and start a true uncensored user rated site....like DIGG but without the bullshit DIGG is pulling!

http://www.dugg.com/


just a thought.....

[DDMX]

I don't think it would work with the copyright / trademark issues. Their lawyers would shoot it down.

(I'm surprised they haven't bought it yet)

[Shink]

Instead, just make RIGGD.com popular. Expand on it.

[UtahApocalypse]

So you would rather have a Democracy then a Republic?

[JimInNY]

I made a site for that reason a while back. http://zlonk.com/

It never really took off.

Maybe with the revolution in full swing, it could?

[Mini-Me]

So you would rather have a Democracy then a Republic?

This isn't really the case - if it weren't for superusers and bias coming from the top, digg would be very Republican in nature; in other words, "majority rule, minority rights." By majority rule, I mean that the most popular stories and comments (dugg by the most people, buried by the fewest) would rise to the top, but the others ones would still remain on the site. In a truly Democratic system, the majority would completely wipe out the comments of the minority and ban them. ;)

Digg itself is very Republican on the surface, but the bias and apparent creation of superusers means that it's actually run like an oligarchy (in which government elites can arbitrarily mess with the system).

[Mini-Me]

I made a site for that reason a while back. http://zlonk.com/

It never really took off.

Maybe with the revolution in full swing, it could?

The problem is that it would really just become a nest of Ron Paul supporters; everyone else would continue using Digg, since they see no reason not to.

[Redcard]

You tried to game Digg, and the algorithim beat you down. There are THOUSANDS of people that would have killed for the attention we got on Digg for their own companies, and hundreds of companies that offer consultation on just how to do that. Don't blame Digg for the fact that the algorithm has adjusted overtime to handle the same groups of people mass-digging or mass-burying based on keywords.

[Mini-Me]

Redcard, nobody ever tried to "game" digg; Ron Paul supporters are digg users like any others. We dugg up articles important to us the same way everyone else does with articles important to them. The only thing that changed was that digg began to specifically work against Ron Paul articles (creating superusers that could kill the digg effort with one bury, etc.). While this is perfectly legal and perfectly fine to do based on property rights, it's still kind of crappy and underhanded when their "About Us" page reads, "If your submission rocks and receives enough Diggs, it is promoted to the front page for the millions of our visitors to see." In other words, they claim to cede to a democratic/republican vote process, yet there are actually oligarchical control schemes at work.

[theantirobot]

Someone is already starting a liberty oriented social news site with some serious financial backing. wait 3 months.