Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try saying something patriotic on reddit and see how fast you will get downvoted to hell.
Same thing would have happened to you 15 years ago on reddit
I've been on Reddit almost since day 1. It was not like this.
Digg.com is back
131–140 of 211 posts
Re: Digg.com is back
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Okay, "LGBTQ loving" just makes you sound incredibly hateful I agree with the general overall point, certain views get banned, they took down nonewnormal while allowing bots in r/coronavirus to flourish, and other examples I can think of But you... just sound like you're not valid at all, when you lead off like that
there is no way bro is mentally stable w a comment like that
prob one of the Q anon and anti-vaxxer types who keeps Alex Jones websites bookmarked and only gets their news from real-patriots-of-america-news.info
Re: Digg.com is back
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
They’re are plenty of bigot-loving Reddit clones, if that’s your thing.
[flagged]
It never ceases to amaze me how people will happily parrot the most vile blood libels about entire groups of people they don't know.
All because they're terrified that the next woman they leer at might not have been born with the genitals they expected.
Re: Digg.com is back
#134My ideal social media site would be a slight modification of the link aggregator model. Instead of a centralized repository of links with comments, it would be a sort of overlay on top of every other website that would create a comment section that isn’t owned or moderated by the original host. It would encourage folks to actual read the original articles and visit those sites, but allow you to have discussions with…
It essentially needs to be a p2p/dht list of disconnected hosts who all provide communities that can be overlaid. You dont want one comment section. Then through filters you can enable or disable which communities you want to see.
It also should be a protocol that lets the client decide how to render the organization of comments and the editor.
Re: Digg.com is back
#135When did it leave? Was there a period of time where the site was offline? Looks like they just tore down the old site and put up a landing page?
The original Digg was shut down around 2012 (though really it died in 2010). The domain was sold off and the new owners replaced it with something that might have looked like Digg at first glance, but it was entirely relying on editors to select posts... Basically, it was a curated blog themed to look like a social media site. That version of Digg limped along for almost twice as long as the original Digg, until a fe…
Whoa Kevin Rose bought it back? Interesting.
Also... bring back TechTV lol
Re: Digg.com is back
#136Digg failed because they weren't listening to what the users wanted. Reddit has been doing the same thing for a long time, and there's a large number of people looking for somewhere to migrate to. It'd be hilarious if New Digg becomes that, but I'm feeling pretty skeptical that New Digg is going to be any better. What little I've seen about New Digg talks about crypto, AI, and "Gems" you can earn which is far from a…
I think this is basically misguided. Digg failed because their commenter UX was clunky. It tried to split the baby between linear and tree comments and just ended up being a mess. Reddit had been slowly stealing traffic from Digg for years by the time of the "rebellion". In the end, Reddit became many times larger than Digg ever was. The biggest problem with displacing Reddit as such is that currently most of the use…
> Digg failed because their commenter UX was clunky
Is this why it failed? I recall they started doing pay-for-placement, gaming their own voting system at a time when they were neck-at-neck with Reddit, which wasn't. I do remember Digg's UX getting shittier and shittier though; every time I checked back on it to see if it was worth visiting again it was always mind-blowingly worse.
Re: Digg.com is back
#137I think that social media has been a massive experiment where we asked, what if we let capital interests subvert our desire for community to get us to watch ads? And we have learned that it’s just not a good idea. I think perhaps Digg was one of the better ones but I solemnly wish social media was mostly illegal, especially advertising based, for profit sites. I think hacker news manages to be ok since it doesn’t rel…
Hackernews remains mostly ok by focusing on a niche that’s always been easy on the Internet for obvious reasons: tech. Once it strays even one step away, like the intersection of tech and policy, or the intersections of science and humanities, guaranteed you will get some totally ridiculous takes. And, HN can only not-rely on advertising because it exists as a sort of funny pseudo-advertisement thing for some startup…
Hackernews mostly survives because it's the Y Combinator sponsored boardwalk over the incessantly sucking carp of tech bro daydreamers hoping for success by osmosis.
Re: Digg.com is back
#138Back in the day I was mostly on slashdot, Reddit, digg, and metafilter. Digg was the first site where I started seeing brainrot nonsense content on the front page every day, with orders of magnitude larger than usual upvotes of tech news, from the same small number of usernames (Mr BabyMan, I hate that I even remember your stupid username). For me, Digg was the first time experiencing product managers experimenting w…
Wow, I was trying to remember his username, but I wasn't even getting close. Quite impressive haha.
Re: Digg.com is back
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
you aren't a patriot tho if you hate gay people you are actually the opposite of a patriot lol
Who said I hate gay people? I am saying what the trends and narratives are. I feel like HN users don't know how to read and understand comments.
When listing off your complaints, that it was "LGBTQ-loving" was one of them. Like what's wrong with a site being in favor of LGBTQ people?
Re: Digg.com is back
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same thing would have happened to you 15 years ago on reddit
I've been on Reddit almost since day 1. It was not like this.
The best thing they ever did in those early days was remove /r/atheism from the default subs. Good lord what a cesspool (and I'm not a theist!).