Hot Air is reporting that Digg is cracking down on the Diggbat bury brigades.
What they are actually asking is that the diggbats “wait two minutes after the story hits the page before flushing it down the toilet for having been authored by a conserva…

Axe,

What do you mean link saturation?

It’s a vague set of arguments that we’ve been trying to formalize over here; I’m not sure if anyone else has actually done it.

There is a problem with linking documents such that the linking ceases to be useful after a certain point; a person can get more work done (using a narrow definition, “finding out the answer to a specific question more quickly”) if fewer links were used. This idea is illustrated by asking when information should be repeated in context, and when fragments of information, independent of context, should be linked together to form a whole (complete localization).

An example of a document that is effectively ‘unlinked’ (and completely saturated) is a text where every single word is linked to an index of that word—probably very useful in some circumstances, but for most uses, a person would probably just read the text without clicking anything, because the person would know following the links walks them down an endless (literally) rabbit trail. They’ll just stick with the information on the page. The few links they would actually take? Maybe someone’s name, or another document that is given as the authority on the subject: those are the useful links.

All theory, all arguable, all interesting if software is your gig :) But sorry about that — I was actually just thinking out loud I guess.

What do you mean link saturation?

Digg’s entire business model is based on communitty participation. How could they possibly do what you say?

They couldn’t, but it’s a glaring problem that’s built in to the whole web 2.0 concept. Just as wikipedia shows the problem of link saturation, digg shows the problem of wholly interactive media.

The answer is probably ‘communities.’ —that’s right; watch for it; segregation goes electronic :)

Micheal Moore vs Fred Thompson

Oh my god that Hillary pick is just plain disturbing William Amos. Now I need to find one of those flashy things from MIB that erases memory. Yikes.

Zetterson on May 23, 2007 at 4:06 PM

I wasn’t so foolish as to click on the link. Don’t need my mind f* with today, enough bad news on the wires as is.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qiSkyEyBczU&mode=related&search=

Great Link. You captured Jack Nicholson as the Joker perfectly. Great pic!!

Hillary closeup

“And now, young Skywalker…you will die!”

Digg’s entire business model is based on communitty participation. How could they possibly do what you say?

JayHaw Phrenzie on May 23, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Im not saying people cant post articles. Im saying that people shouldnt have the power to censor or control anyone elses posts.

Hillary closeup

AIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

(evil Irishman….evil evil man)

BTW Allah or Ian here is a good new hillary pic for you

Hillary closeup

William Amos on May 23, 2007 at 4:01 PM

Shiver me timbers!

BTW Allah or Ian here is a good new hillary pic for you

Hillary closeup

William Amos on May 23, 2007 at 4:01 PM

No wonder Bill avoids it for all but 70 days a year.

Its online censorship of the mob.

Unless it is jihadi or Nazi material. Then grup condemnation has no effect.

Hillary closeup

That’s a keeper.

Digg and every other online site (including yahoo and youTube) seriously needs to dump any kind of recomendation/condemnation.

Digg’s entire business model is based on communitty participation. How could they possibly do what you say?

Hillary closeup

Its a thing that is far too easy to abuse.

Its online censorship of the mob.