This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed

Comments: 25

• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  ARealPatriot

  Aug. 14, 2006, 8:34 a.m.

  Digg is inherently corrupt, they lie about how the site works by engaging in massive censoring behind the scenes.

  So, I guess its ironic that someone is now complaining of a group that is using the system exactly like they advertise it. I guess such critics need not worry however, since as my first sentence is true, if digg doesnt like whats going on digg would manipulate, censor and delete it - thats what they do.

  What I really see this as being about however, is the large rise in interest in third political parties - that has the major 2 corrupt keepers of power shaking in their boots. And that cant be bad. Go Libertarians go!
• 
  Avg rating: (+1/-0 1)

  Fabienne

  Aug. 14, 2006, 8:35 a.m.

  Promoting stories along party-lines is an interesting conundrum. On one hand there are quite a few members of Netscape convinced that those of us employed by Netscape are "liberal quacks" and that the majority of the stories voted to the front page or pinned are biased towards a liberal point of view. On the other hand, the moment a story from perhaps a more conservative point of view gets posted and voted to the front page, we tend to receive a flood of emails to our feedback line complaining that we let biased conservative stories get to the front page. The reality is that any individual or group can submit stories to our system, if they aren't spam or otherwise violate our terms of service, they can get voted to the front page or be chosen to be pinned to the top of a channel by an anchor. I personally am revising my rss reader to include perhaps some more conservative feeds and/or libertarian feeds. I am open to any suggestions for strong writing from any political point of view.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Neophile

  Aug. 14, 2006, 10:02 a.m.

  I find it interesting that people would look at this as a problem. I doubt this would be considered as big a problem if it were not politically-related. I would encourage anyone who thinks this is a problem to "solve" it contributing and telling their friends to contribute. The more everyone contributes, the more relevant these socially driven sites are to more people.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  mahesh67

  Aug. 14, 2006, 10:47 a.m.

  "Digg is inherently corrupt, they lie about how the site works by engaging in massive censoring behind the scenes."

  Good thing nothing like that could happen here.
• 
  Avg rating: (+1/-0 1)

  Fabienne

  Aug. 14, 2006, 11:41 a.m.

  mahesh67: As I mentioned above, it doesn't happen unless the site is spam-tastic. If you have some constructive ideas of how to become more balanced please do share.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  jrlecato

  Aug. 14, 2006, 11:44 p.m.

  PARTIES, PARTIES THE REAL DEAL IS THE POEPLE OF AMERICA!!!!JUST VOTE FOR THE GUY THAT IS TELLING THE TRUTH! THAT IS ALL REPUBLICAN, DEMOCART, GREEN PEACE, WHATEVER..... I COULD CARE LESS WHO'S IN THE WHITEHOUSE AS LONG AS HE IS HONEST AND AMERICA COMES FIRST, FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  godless-infidel

  Aug. 15, 2006, 1:11 p.m.

  Neophile:

  You find it interesting because I believe you are simple-minded. It is not really what ends up on the front page, but rather what gets pinned by the anchors, who votes for what, and what kind of article is submitted. When I see the usual Navigators and top contributors AND Jason Calacanis vote on and/or post articles that are clearly biased, untruthful, suspect, and just plain ludicrous, it raises suspicion. It raises questions about honesty, integrity, and responsibility as it pertains to Netscape and to its team. Or it raises questions of the intelligence of the Netscape team. The fact that these articles land on the front page by the usual suspects is just the icing on the cake to support these questions.

  Bottom line is: anchors, top contributors, and Navigators need to take responsibility in what you post, pin, and/or vote for. Garbage in: garbage out.

  I'd really hate to see Netscape as a dump.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  godless-infidel

  Aug. 18, 2006, 3:31 a.m.

  Worker:

  Yeah, but balance doesn’t sell, sensationalism does. Right Netscape team??
• 
  Avg rating: (+1/-0 1)

  MikeReardon

  Aug. 18, 2006, 4:46 a.m.

  When California's Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, goes after the teachers next time or the nurses, don't be surprised if you get 10,000 votes for articles from their union papers explaining his backward stance on their pet peeves. It is a good way to get your views into the political mix and explain what your issues are. And with many of California's referendums being written backwards with a 'no' vote meaning 'yes', you can expect this place to be ten times it size now, and a lot of people giving out there information on each of those issues. I think we hope it gets to that size someday and reflects that interest.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  ptath2

  Oct. 16, 2006, 10:19 a.m.

  This shouldn't be shocking to anyone, the author of this piece would be pleased as punch if this effort was one launchd by sociallist/democratic groups, and would be equally outraged if the effort came from a conservative group. When you have an open news forum like netscape and digg, you will get organized efforts to get messages out, and Libertarians have just as much right to do it as everyone else. I am glad they are doing it, we need more view points represented in all facets of American life, I for one would like to hear an alternative to theocracy, and government controled economy.

The first 10 comments are shown. Show all 25 comments »