TarMac101

Facebook's Dilema

2009-06-04T12:14:00.003-07:00

Facebook is facing a real dilema it seems. According to a report by the folks at the Blog-a-torium site the people at Facebook are knee deep in the Free Speech versus Censorship issue. It seems that Brian Cuban, a Dallas attorney who runs The Cuban Revolution Blogsite, has been fighting to have the people at Facebook remove various Holocaust-denial groups from the Facebook site on the grounds that the sites is hate speech that promotes antisemitism. Meanwhile, Facebook's stance is that the pages, although distasteful and offensive, are not against Facebook's policies. The issue expanded from being a disagreement between Mr. Cuban and Facebook to being an item picked up by numerous blogs and news agencies.

The variety of responses to this issue ranges widely, it seems people from all viewpoints in the spectrum have made their comments upon this issue. This has become one hot topic that could serve as a litmus test for future handling of social media sites and other forums across the net in the future.

A vast number of people make reference to such things as laws which govern the freedom of speech and freedom of expression. while others point out that this isn't necessarily a 'legal' issue - it's more of a moral or ethical issue. Many have brought up the point of Facebook being a 'Private Entity', which are not governed by the first amendment. Others brought up the point that in some countries "hate speech" is against the law and by Facebook allowing their site to broadcast illegal content into their country, Facebook is in violation of the laws of those countries.

The debate rages on...

The real question is "What is at stake here?"

One school of thought is that these pages offer no threat to anyone, the things posted to the pages are merely the viewpoint of a particular group of people. They stand on the ground that if we censor things simply because we find the content 'distasteful' then we subject ourselves to the 'thought police' and begin the downward spiral into an Orwellian 1984-like existence.

Another school of thought is that these pages are just another step in the steadily declining moral and ethical values of our society. They concern themselves with the issue of "Where does the nonsense end?" Do we allow ourselves to become so apathetic over things that we allow another Hitler to rise to power, or worse, simply because we are afraid of 'policing' ourselves??

It's an interesting debate.

A Night Before Diggmas

2008-11-30T20:27:00.001-07:00

I found this listed at Razzmuffin, but you have to go to Blog-a-torium to read the poem... it's called "'Twas the night before Diggmas" and is sort of cute. Let the Digg, Mixx and other social site parodies commence. Tis the season, you know. lol

Digg Analytics: PMS Review

2008-11-05T09:15:00.004-07:00

One of the prime things most "Diggers' get concerned over is the question of "How To Get More Diggs", the usual answer to this question falls under the heading of Digg Analytic Tools. Digg seems to be made aware that it's virtually impossible for a person to treat 4 million people fairly and equally. Digg only allows 1,000 friends, they allow 1,000 or less diggs per day, they seem to frown on people utilizing what they (themselves) offer their members whenever the Digger seems too efficient. When you go outside of Digg by using programs, bots and scripts designed by others... they seems to not like that either. Unless you Digg an item by clicking through to the item, spend the amount of time they feel you should take to read the item, then come back and Digg the item... there is a good chance that you can be accused of using some bot or evil tactic on Digg and be banned.

There does seem to be a solution to this problem of appeasing Digg, as well as appeasing other Diggers. The solution seems to be a thing called PMS Suite, give it a look and decide for yourself - but PMS Suite mostly will direct you to items posted to Digg and other Diggers who would best suit the person. It doesn't seem to actually do anything like mass digg, but I am still checking this out to be sure.

PMS Suite uses the information from Digg and sorts through it all... pulling out the items that best suits your criteria. That's a very simplistic way of describing it and a more full explanation may show this as not completely correct... but it will suffice for now and it may suffice for those who are not very tech oriented.

I won't go further on this, due to my wanting you to check this out on your own and reach your own conclusions... but I do feel this item is worth a look-see.

Digg Uproar: An Interview with Ashmadai

2008-10-05T09:55:00.003-07:00

Ashmadai, of Ashmadai's Blog, has written numerous blog posts under the Digg Uproar heading and his posts have recently been seen appearing over at Digg on occasion. I've decided to try to interview the man and reluctantly he agreed. This interview was done on the 4th of October, 2008.

The Interview

Tarmac: Good Morning. We have Ashmadai, of Ashmadai's Blog on the phone and he has agreed to do an interview about him, his works, his objects, and whatever else crops up. Are you there, Ashmadai!

Ashmadai: Yes I am. I, at least, hope so. (laughs)

Tarmac: What do I call you?

Ashmadai: Many of the people I've known on the internet over the years called me Az or Ash. Either one of those will do.

Tarmac: Az? Is that short for Arizona?

Ashmadai: No, Az is short for Asmodeus.

Tarmac: I think the most pressing question for you to answer is "Who are you?". What I mean is "What makes you the expert?".

Ashmadai: Did I say I was an expert? I must have missed something! (Laughter)

I am just a person, Mac, a person who has observed things and people for a few decades now. I don't promote myself as an expert, nor do I seek out attention. I simply write my blogs, my replies to posts, my comments to Mixx and other sites. I may stand my ground and argue my points, but in the end I feel everyone has their own opinions and odds are no one is 100% right. Some may be more right than others, but no one is a Godling or has the inside track to having the only correct answer to life.

Tarmac: Give us a little background on yourself?

Ashmadai: In 1994 I bought my first computer, it was a cheesy little thing - a 386 - 16 Mhz with 1 or 2 megs of RAM and a 40 meg hard drive. Shortly after getting the computer, my two nephews set me up with a Bulletin Board system. I toyed with the BBS and what resulted was a BBS called "Uncle John's Cabin", after the song "Uncle Tom's Cabin" by Warrant. It was sort of a joke between my one nephew and myself. Anyway, that BBS grew into the ProNet network, which was on the old Fido-style system. As the site and net grew, a friend of mine with a much larger computer opened up a BBS called "Hell's Gate". Since I was becoming well versed in BBSes and BBS Systems, he asked if I would be a "Co-Sysop". I said Yes and he told me I needed a "Handle" to fit the theme of his board. It was "Hell" oriented and since we played around with AD&D during the 80s, I searched the names of Demons and came up with Asmodeus. A couple years later we moved Hell's Gate and ProNet to the Internet and I brought the Ashmadai name with me. About a year later I began running on a system called ICQ, the problem was that when I searched for a name to use... there was already another Asmodeus... I found out that Ashmadai and Aeshma Deva were unused and chose Ashmadai because Aeshma Deva sounded too much like a woman's handle. (Laughs)

Tarmac: You mentioned "ProNet", is that the same....

Ashmadai: No. I hate to cut you off... but I get tough on that issue and want to clear things up right away. Today there are a lot of ProNet sites out there, at least there are a lot of hits on Google about ProNet. One of the most famous is the ProNet Advertising site, which seems to be owned by Neil Patel and prime Digger Muhammed Saleem has something to do with it. (We can toss them a link here, if you wish to do so.) I think that ProNet began around 2003 - I don't think it's the same one that existed in 1996/1997. I'm sure you could get the history of it on the net somewhere. I dropped using the ProNet name in early 1998 when I did a websearch and found a ProNet site, that site seemed to be on the internet since around 1996 and it became very questionable as to who actually first used the name "ProNet" on the internet. So to stop any confusion I dropped my net, it wasn't really going anywhere anyway and this other place was more popular. As I sort of lead up to.... I don't know if Neil owned that site or not, but his site is a pretty good site and I go there fairly often to see what he or Saleem is saying.

Tarmac: Do you feel, sometimes, that 'someone' stole your thunder with ProNet?

Ashmadai: No. You have to realize how the internet was back in the mid-90s. It was a virtual wasteland right up until 96, give or take a year or so, then it exploded with enough force to form a galaxy. When I first hit the net, there really wasn't much on it. It was fairly easy to lay claim to handles and site names. One of the problems were that the search engines did not always pick up on things it should have - for whatever reason. One time you checked you might have found "ProNet" in the results, then you might go for weeks without ever seeing a hint of it. It's hard to be totally original, the internet brings that idea home more than anything. What I feel is that I brought over the name of my net and had no other direction than to use it for the purpose of using it for a website or something. It was a stupid name for a website anyway. This other guy used it as a place to sell things and put out information for others to use.... in a way it felt good to see the ProNet name being used for something useful.

Tarmac: You do remember that this is for an interview and will be published? (Laughs)

Ashmadai: That's ok, send me a copy before you post it and I'll remove anything I don't want published. (Laughs)

Tarmac: Let's accelerate this a little bit and talk of what you have done all these years on the internet. First question, how many years have you been on the net?

Ashmadai: Oooh, "Accelaration", that's almost as fun as "Demolition"! (Laughs)

I would say I first ran across Fidonet in 1992 or 1993. In 1993 I used to visit my sister and nephew, who both were active on Fidonet, and they would show me the message forums on that net. I would sometimes post comments, but rarely. So I would say that I, personally, have been on one net or another since about June of 1994... that is what? 14 Years and 4 months now? Prior to that I was just horsing around. Now, I went to the Internet around September of 1995, I believe, maybe it was closer to Christmas. The reason I went to the internet was because NetZero (and other places) offered "Free ISPs". So I took advantage of it and surfed the net for free. Eventually I went out and paid for my own ISP, but if it wasn't for places like NetZero - I may have never made the move to the net.

Tarmac: So what have you been doing on the net since?

Ashmadai: A little bit of this, a little bit of that, some of the next thing and a whole lot of the other thing! (Laughs) You name it, I probably tried it. (More Laughs) My first love are the "Discussion and Debate" forums, so when I came to the net - I sought those out. Shortly after joining the net I began building websites, nothing spectacular - mind you, just simple sites that looked good. Then I found AIM (AOL Internet Messaging) and ICQ, along with other IM clients. In 1999 I found a 'thing" called "FireTalk", it was perhaps the best Chat/IM client on the net... but the people running it blew that ball of wax. I'd probably still be on FireTalk, if it wasn't shut down and sold to PalTalk. So mostly I've been on the chat, messaging, and website building scene.

Tarmac: How many "sites" did you have?

Ashmadai: I've owned more websites than I care to remember. Every year I would put up another holiday site, I've opened sites up for putting out information pertaining to Genealogy and things like "Dowsing", I've put up some really useless sites that had no other purpose than to waste space. I would guess that I had over 100 of my own websites over the years, plus I have shown 3 or 4 hundred people how to develope sites and many of them went on to create sites far better than I could ever do. I also would start message boards. I like message boards and probably had, or still have, 1 or more boards on just about every system out there. (Laughs) The topics on these boards would range from General Topics to specific topics like Current Events. I won't even begin to count the number of message/chat sites I've had. Now-a-days I am happy enough just using sites that others set up, like Digg or Mixx. I still build websites and play with them.

Tarmac: Sounds like you kept busy.

Ashmadai: Yeah, I guess I have. My time isn't only devoted to the internet. I've learned to use Paint Shop Pro (PSP), for example, on my own. I am no master of it, but I can do somethings with it. A woman I know from Florida showed me how to use spreadsheets. I've made drawings of homes for people, designed a mini-storage site or two. Yeah I keep busy, but then again I have a lot of time to fill. I've also been doing things like Blogs, and like the web site and message board thing... I would sometimes set up and manage a blog site for others. My activities has caused confusion, in the past, amongst certain people as to my real identity. It amazes me how many people can't accept the simple truth and go to great lengths to figure things out. (Laughs)

Tarmac: So tell us about you and Digg?

Ashmadai: We're in love. We are going to get married next spring. Our first baby is going to be called Kevin Jay, even if it is a girl. (Laughs) Digg is the jealous type, Mac, and slightly paranoid too boot! (more laughs)

You know, Maybe I shouldn't say that... someone may actually take me seriously on it and try to spin it into an "Ashmadai Loves Digg" thing. There's usually one or a dozen of those types of people about! (Laughs).

Seriously, I have nothing against Digg and sort of like it... or rather I like the idea behind Digg. As you can probably tell by my responses, I like things where the users can interact with each other. I personally think that Mixx has the potential of being "The Next Big Thang"... but Digg has that Ajax thing going on and it's set up fairly well. I am just convinced that the people at Digg have no clue as to how to properly run a forum. They are too into that "Give them the idea this is a democracy, but we will override the democratic process whenever we shoose" thing. I've seen board and sites like that ten times over in the past and all of them eventually failed. ICQ is about the only long-term, successful failure out there and the reason for it's success is that it is full of trolls who keep the place active.

Tarmac: Are you on Digg?

Ashmadai: Ashamadai doesn't have an account on Digg, Mac. I used to be on Digg, but I was banned for a bogus reason. The reason given wasn't exactly in the TOS, I understood Digg's intent - and sort of argeed with the reason, but the fact was that I was banned for something not in their TOS, or TOU as they call it now. I never bothered going back, except to look through the site and see what is being posted to it.

I have, and still do, tell people that Digg is ok to use - if they don't appear to be violating the TOS. I tell them that Digg loves it when people appear to be reading the articles and comment on what others submit. On the other hand there were a few of them who got the "Script Bug" and been caught -- the idiots. You don't need scripts on Digg to get good stats... all you need is time and effort.

.... besides, you contacted me for the interview -- if I recall correctly. (laughs)

Tarmac: (laughs) Yeah I did and I am sure your "idiot" comment will be well received by your friends!

Ashmadai: (laughs) We call each other "Idiot" all the time, I'm not worried - they know I am serious! (Laughs)

Tarmac: What do you mean by a "Properly Run forum"?

Ashmadai: A forum is "A medium for open discussion or voicing of ideas." Digg is a forum, by definition. A properly run forum is a place where all users are treated equally and fairly. You do this by setting up the rules, in an easy to read and easy to understand format. You post these rules, or guidelines if you wish to call them that, on the site where everyone can see them. Then you run the forum in accordance with those rules, verbatim, you don't freelance except where the rules allows it. However even in the case where you have a "catch-all" or an "excessively annoying behavior" rule... then you have to get all of your mods and admins on the same page by giving them guidelines on how to utilize such a rule. You can't have your "deputies" running around making judgments based upon rules that do not exist. You also cannot allow any sub-group of your forum try to run the forum. That's the purpose of your moderators and admins.

Tarmac: Are you insinuating that Digg does this?

Ashmadai: No, I am saying they do do this! I've seen it with my own eyes and I am not a novice at this stuff. Digg might not mean to do this, but never-the-less they do. The worst part is that people see them doing such things and it helps to drive a wedge between Digg and it's members.

Tarmac: Ok, the million dollar question -- "What would you do to change Digg?"

Ashmadai: The first thing I would do is clean up Digg. To do this I would get rid of the bury brigade by taking what illusion of power they have away from them. The main tool I would take away is the Bury Button, at the very least I would have the programmers at Digg change it to where the button only changes what the Burier sees. The thing I would try to achieve is to make the bury button useless as far as removing or degrading items posted by others. If something is offensive, then it's my moderators jobs to do something about it, not someone joining the program with an agenda. The next thing I would do is insure that any spam complaints only get filed if all of the data is filled out properly. That means the person making the complaint has to give their information and a proper email address. They then have to give the proper link to the 'offensive item'. Finally they have to give a 50 to maybe 250 character comment so they can state what they find as offensive. Once again, it's the job of my moderators to do something about offensive material... not the member of the forum. Oh, the members can contact Digg and hilight Digg of problems, that is perfectly fine -- but it's the job of the admins and mods to run the forum and make the decisions on who is violating the TOS and who is not.

Next, I would set a policy of limits - especially since Digg is suddenly concerned with their precious resources. To sidetrack for a few, I find this hilarious. Digg has approximately 4 Million Registered members, yet their system isn't capable of handling the loads. That is odd indeed, but it indicates to me that those people at Digg have not been upgrading the system as they should. Stop and think of it, Digg give every user the option of collecting 1,001 friends... yet if you Digg 1,000 or more posts in a 24 hour period then you could be banned. Now, I ask you a question -- "What is wrong with this picture?".

Tarmac: You sort of put me on the spot here. (Laughs) I would think that if I allowed people 1,000 friends, then it is reasonable to think that each one of those people could post 2 to 5 submittals per day.

Ashmadai: Exactly my point. Digg allows too many friends per person. What I would do is set up Digg to where I have Mutuals, Friends and Fans. A Mutual is a person who we both "Freinded" each other. A "Friend" is a person who I "Friended" but has not friended me back. A "Fan" is a person who "Friended" me, but I have not "Friended" back. Some out there would say "Digg already does this!" and they would be right, but I would make sure the distinction is made in the Friends List.

Next, I would set it up that "Fans" and "Friends" cannot shout , only "Mutuals" can shout. I then would set it up to where the "Friends" are taken out of the "Friends" list and placed in a section of it's own -- like the fans are. I would then make the number of "Friends" unlimited. Since you can't shout a friend, who cares if they are in your main "Friends List". The only purpose for this sub-division is to help the Digger keep track of who "Friended" him or her and who they "Friended".

I then would allow, perhaps 250 Mutuals per person. Some people might want 500 or 1,000... but Digg's concern is the over-loading of their system. On the other hand Mutuals should be expected to 'support each other', otherwise why have 'friends" at all? One should also expect someone "Friending" a person to show some support for that person in order to convince them to become a "Mutual". This is called "being social" and it's unrealistic to think that 4 Million people can, or will, support everyone equally. It is normal for people to break down into smaller, more managable groups -- besides if you insist that 1 digger has to equally treat everyone of the remaining 4 Million people... then you are just promoting "Blind Digging" anyway. Let people choose their friends and support them... and provide incentives and the tools for users to see who supports them and who doesn't. I, personally, don't care about status... if MrBabyman or MSaleem didn't support me enough to please me... I'd drop them from my list and look for someone who will give me diggs. These people are not Godlings, they might deserve some respect -- but they are no more of a God than I am or you are. I am sure they do the exact same thing anyway and understand this concept.

Finally, I would implement the limits that a person can digg no more than 1,000 diggs per day, post no more than maybe 24 submittals per day and they could comment all they like. As far as shouts? I would set it up to where you can shout all your Mutuals and digg sends out those shouts over a period of time of say an hour. That basically means people can only make 24 shouts per day. I would also tell people that the rule is no more than 3 or 5 URLs per shout, since Digg has banned people for shouting large shouts in the past. You might not even put this 'rule' in , instead you might only allow 1 shout per hour to your entire "Mutuals" list (or a part of it) and you might simply only allow 150 or 250 characters per shout.

Tarmac: Is there anything else you would do?

Ashmadai: Now that you mention it, if I was Digg then I would post a definition of Spam and not leave it up to the individual to define the term. You potentially have up to 4 Million definitions of Spam floating around Digg and they mostly amount to "Spam is what I think it is". That is wrong to do, although it may sound good in writing or when brainstorming -- it just doesn't work in practice. Thousands of sites across the net over the past 12 years or so tried this approach and all it did was create chaos and problems in the long run.

Tarmac: Above you mentioned the "Bury Brigade". What is it and why are you hot on this topic?

Ashmadai: I'm not going to make very many friends here today, am I? (Laughs)

The Digg Bury Brigade, sometimes called the Digg Mafia, are a group of people who feels it's their right to control Digg - even though they have no moral or legal standing to do so. They feel it's their right, or obligation, to bury anything they wish simply because they don't like what someone submitted. Sometimes these people bury a thing because it doesn't match with with political or religious views, sometimes they bury the item because they think it's not current, the reason doesn't matter - they just click the bury button because they can and maybe because they think this upsets others. I have run into many Bury Brigades over the years and most of them are just purely control freaks, who most likely have little or no control of their own lives -- so they control what they can on these forums. Others are just plain and simple trolls. No matter what they are, I oppose them.

I do, however, back the idea that the members of the forum should have a say over what is acceptable or not on the forum or site. Balancing this act can be difficult, but if I owned a site then it's my job to try to find a balance amongst as many different types of people joining my forum as possible. If one group can't abide by someone else having a different point of view... well maybe the forum they are on isn't the one for them?

Tarmac: Let's play a game of word association? Are you up for it?

Ashmadai: Why not? I could be eating pizza and watching the football game on TV... but since I am here... (laughs)

Tarmac: Ok, here goes. Zaibatsu!

Ashmadai: Reg? What can one say about Reg! (laughs) I like Zaibatsu, even though I only know him from Digg, Mixx and a couple of videos from Babyman's site. He seems to have a good sense of humor, seems intelligent, seems to want to make something of himself, and he has 'friended" me and a few people I knew when he didn't have to do so. Reg is a good guy, seemingly and I think he got a raw deal from Digg. Is that enough?

Tarmac: Do you want to say more about him?

Ashmadai: (laughs) I am not sure what else I can say, to tell the truth. He's ok in my book.

Tarmac: Mr. Babyman!

Ashmadai: Poor Mr. Babyman. (laughs) It took me almost a month to get him to Mutual me, when I was on Digg, then I went and got myself banned. I've always felt bad about that. I don't know Andy very well, I've dugg his stuff and seen his videos... or podcasts, I think they call them. Andy seems ok. I had the pleasure of seeing the one on Youtube that had his daughter in it and she was simply adorable. As far as his reputation, good and bad, I've seen no evidence of Babyman using scripts and such... except for the claims of no one able to digg and submit as much as he has -- but then again I know the guy who dugg over 20,000 posts in a week and 4,000 in one day, he did all that organically and by using one browser screen. I know that to be true because I work on his computer and seen him in action -- the guy couldn't master a script if the life of his family depended on it, but he is quick on the mouse and changing screens. I think the calls to ban Babyman are way out of line. .. personally I'd tend to ban some of the ones calling for his banning from digg because I've looked at their profile and if they are Digg Mafia or bury brigade -- I'll eat my hat. (Laughs)

Tarmac: MSaleem?

Ashmadai: Saleem? A hard nut to crack (Laughs). I never did get Saleem to friend me back and to tell the truth - I am P.O.'d over it. No Christmas presents for him this year. (laughs). Seriously? Saleem is probably a good guy and he seems intelligent. Other than that I wouldn't know what else to say about him.

Tarmac: Chris Lang? I know you and he know each other.

Ashmadai: You're right, I know Chris. I've been reading his stuff for months and watched him grow from ambitious wannabe to a real force in the future of the internet. Chris can be obnoxious, overbearing, loud-mouthed and irritating... but he also knows his stuff and can be of great help. The guy has an analytical mind, yet he has the ability to use that mind for more than just "normal" topics. The guy can equally analyze Google and still disect the new Battlestar Galactica series with equal adeptness. He's not just all social marketing, seo and that stuff that most finds as boring or mundane. Chris and I argue frequently enough about things, but never mistake me as saying he is a dunderhead and doesn't know what he is talking about. Sometimes people who become friends simply argue for the hell of it. (laughs)

Tarmac: OptimusPrime?

Ashmadai: Ripped off! I really haven't said a great deal on this, not like I did for Zaibatsu, but Digg is wrong for banning users for things done weeks or months ago.

When you are raising Kids or Dogs, you don't punish either for things they did days or weeks ago because neither will really understand why they are being punished. If Digg knew OP violated the rules on, oor before, October 1st -- then they should have punished him on, or before, October 1st. You punish the user of a site for what he did today, or perhaps yesterday. Strike that... You punish a member of a site within a reasonable time after the alleged incident.

If I missed someone violating the rules on my sites last Wednesday, I write them a PM or Email stating what I found and tell them to not do this again for I am watching. It may not be worded in that way, but the meaning is the same. Yes, the member does get away with a violation... but if I and my staff were doing their duty then we would have caught the violation within hours after it was made. That is our loss, our mistake. We work to rectify such mistakes from ever happening in the future... but we don't punish people for things left go for days and weeks on end. Now if at the time a mention of the violation was made to the guy and nothing was done - then it could have been said that we'll deal with this violation when the full investigation is over. That isn't the same as saying "Oh we checked our records and found that you, Mr. Digger, posted 3,000 diggs in 3 hours on January 3rd, 2006 -- therefore we are going to permanently ban you". That is just plain wrong.

End Rant (Laughs).

Tarmac: Tarmac!

Ashmadai: The site or the blogger? I'll answer both. I like your earlier postings, I'm not sure it benefits you to get on the "Digg Train". (Laughs) I've known of you for awhile too and perhaps the word "idiot" applies! (Laughs)

Tarmac: Gee Thanks!

Ashmadai: No problemo!

Tarmac: You say you still go to Digg?

Ashmadai: Yes I do....

Tarmac: Which women are the "Hottest" diggers on Digg?

Ashmadai: Ouch, that one really got me back for the "idiot" comment. (laughs) I could get shot down from all directions on this one. Some women don't like to be rated, so if I name one then I have that battle. Other women will take offense if they aren't mentioned, I'm doomed there too. (laughs) Geez... how about "All of them". (laughs.

Tarmac: Chicken (laughs)

Ashmadai: I didn't live until my 50s by being stupid or carless, Mac. (Laughs)

Tarmac: It seems like we are at the end of the interview. Thanks for answering my questions, Ash.

Ashmadai: It was sort of fun, thanks for having me. It's my first interview and quite frankly I don't see what all the hype is about. (laughs).

End Interview

Digg Uproar: What's Next For Digg?

2008-09-22T07:59:00.003-07:00

Is the Digg Smackdown upon us? Last week Digg banned anywhere from 150 to 0ver 600 of it's members and the effects of the shake up is spreading far and wide across the net. Mixx, Propeller, Sphinn and other social sites all have had postings concerning this. The Blogosphere is on fire with blogs concerning the Digg Bannings.

On Get Smart Girl's Blog, she began a list of "Our Fallen Digg Comrades", I will upload this list here, which contains names not on her list, for her to steal whenever she wishes. Let us take a moment to reflect upon these "fallen comrades" ( You can imagine someone reading the names to a mild drum beat as you scroll by):

# Digg Handle
1 1greenthumb
2 1LittleScout
3 1only
4 AdamBomb
5 Adecruza
6 AKittenOne
7 AKPwnz
8 AKShay1409
9 Ameologger
10 amigoro
11 anchalsingh
12 antifederalist
13 Angel1379
14 arewhyfour
15 ArnoldPettibone
16 ArnoldPettybone
17 Awesomeintheory
18 axemantitan
19 Babblin5
20 BCCStu
21 bcuban
22 bennygreenberg
23 bestdamntech
24 bgholt1970
25 bigtimenerd
26 BornReady
27 broalexinfo
28 bubashelili
29 BuzzDiggity
30 cGt2099
31 chocfever212
32 claybodie
33 complicious
34 cuzzy
35 CyberPhoenix
36 DeathWish808
37 dechsiri
38 DiffeeOnline
39 diggamer
40 Diggboss
41 diggchairman
42 diggrnumber1
43 diggthiscrap
44 disco1stu
45 effektz
46 emobrat
47 emcelettronica
48 erichansa
49 ernesto99
50 erwin74
51 explicitmemory
52 fangsinmybread
53 felix118
54 Fizban30
55 funkyjenn
56 game-hawg
57 GeorgeCarlin
58 getsmartgal
59 GiantRiverOtter
60 gigamegater
61 Gutspiller
62 hubfriends
63 icupcake
64 jasonkeath
65 joey86
66 joyntheir
67 jstroh
68 karjosh
69 KevinFederline
70 kianat
71 kickoff22
72 kloop10
73 koolbreeze
74 kristenmunson
75 kylerannell
76 linkedList
77 lithiumplus
78 livingstrong
79 loky
80 lordhuggington
81 lukadium
82 macsken
83 mad5
84 masternajee
85 MasterOfHyrule
86 mattgup
87 mattman12345
88 mazerstar
89 mcatrage
90 michaelwong38
91 michDdot
92 MicleMihai
93 misanthropegirl
94 mobiledigg
95 MrB398
96 mrbabymin*
97 mydigga
98 mynamefat
99 Mythos
100 nattyb
101 neiltc13
102 noname94
103 nousemerk
104 0Boy
105 ojames
106 0livertaco
107 orlando69
108 persisting1
109 polymath22
110 raejak
111 rainfosys
112 rareblue
113 rocket99
114 rockontop
115 rocr69
116 russvirante
117 ShemDaimwood
118 Sh0rtstack
119 skewl
120 snipehack
121 sportscrzy33
122 srhadden
123 stejules
124 stephie189
125 superman7018
126 SurplusAMMO
127 tacostacos
128 taliarose
129 tazzahall
130 terminalcode
131 th13teen
132 theeandrew
133 TheKidd
134 therealduckie
135 therebelsells
136 thomasghenry
137 throattoritoise
138 tneilen
139 toughluck1
140 toxicking9
141 TreeNinja
142 tweez
143 uscfan
144 v666
145 VikingoTJ
146 Vincenzo
147 webaddict
148 Wiinii
149 Zaibatsu**
150 zoomtechtv***

Please Note:

* Mr. Babymin - I've never heard of Mr. Babymin, could the creator of that particular list have meant Mr. BabySaleem? I have noted MrBabySaleem is MIA as well. If these are not the same person, then the list has 151 Banned Diggers.

** Zaibatsu - Zaibatsu was not banned for using scripts, he was banned for allegedly linking to a spam page.

*** ZoomTechTV - ZTTv was not banned by Digg, instead he wrote Digg and asked to have his account closed, apparently in protest of the banning of the 81 users.

Summary in a nutshell:

1. There were over 150 Bannings by Digg over the past week. Some reports says up to 600 people were banned.

2. There were 77 Top 1000 users, according to the Social Blade Site, banned. Only 5 of those Top 1000 users banned were in the Top 100.

3. There were 73 Non-Rated users banned.

4. There is a possibility that one, or more, of the banned Diggers had multiple accounts. An example of this is ArnoldPettibone and ArnoldPettybone.

Concerning Privacy Issues:

This information is all pretty much in the public domain, plus the fact that the personal privacy of the person owning the handle is not compromised. The use of handles on sites are pretty much anonymous and the handle could belong to anyone -- even Kevie Rose. :)

Sources used:

Two main sources were used in the gathering of this information:

SocialBlade's Top 1000 Diggers
http://socialblade.com/digg/top1000users.html

"The Grim Reaper Visits Digg"
http://www.thegetsmartblog.com/2008/09/the-grim-reaper-has-visited-digg/

Other Sources:

Digg Bans Users
http://ashmadai.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/digg-uproar-digg-bans-users/#comments

Digg Uproar: Digg Bans Zaibatsu
http://ashmadai.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/digg-uproar-zaibatsu-banned/

Digg Uproar: Attack on MrBabyman and Blind Digging
http://ashmadai.wordpress.com/2008/09/14/digg-uproar-attack-on-mr-babyman-and-blind-digging/

"Stop the Madness!": Digg Buries Out of Hand
http://ashmadai.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/%E2%80%9Cstop-the-madness%E2%80%9D-digg-buries-out-of-hand/

"I was banned from Digg and for a pretty lame reason"
http://socialnewscentral.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1985121%3ABlogPost%3A14650

"Digg User Zaibatsu banned because of me"
http://www.jackiesjungle.com/2008/09/20/digg-user-zaibatsu-banned-because-of-me

Digg Uproar: Zaibatsu Banned by Digg
http://citysocialmarketing.com/blog/digg-uproar-zaibatsu-banned-by-digg/41/

Digg Uproar: The Rebirth of Zaibatsu
http://citysocialmarketing.com/blog/digg-uproar-the-rebirth-of-zaibatsu/42/

The Digg Uproar Saga: Mr. Babyman and Blind Digging cited as Culprits
http://citysocialmarketing.com/blog/the-digg-uproar-saga-mr-babyman-and-blind-digging-cited-as-culprits/39/

Another Digg Uproar
http://ranlog58.blogspot.com/2008/09/another-digg-uproar.html

Diggteriorata
http://razzmuffinblog.blogspot.com/

Zaibatsu banned from Digg
http://www.keywebdata.com/?p=170

Is This An End To The Digg Mafia?

2008-07-18T10:41:00.006-07:00

For the past few days the net has been buzzing with the news of the new Google Bucket Test which revealed a "Digglike" Interface. In light of the fact that Google has backed these reports with their own Experimental Lab Report, the Digg Mafia hitmen already have been at work busily burying such articles as "Innacurate Content" or "General Buries". It seems that Digg, once again, turned a blind eye to these antics. This brings about the question of "Is Digg too stupid to learn from past mistakes?" or "Does Digg walk the walk, instead of just talking the talk?" ~ either way the answers are probably something we Diggers will never learn. If a response is done at all, by Digg, odds are that they will push off the blame onto the members... instead of admitting their own mistakes and rectifying it.

The new Google Interface has promise for it seems to be set up to where a bury brigade can't stop the views of others, except on their own results page. The votes and comments of Googlers seem to remain for all to see, unless you block the content to your own Google Search screen. This is good news for those wanting honesty and integrity in the things which they are interested. Surely the Digg Mafia hates it with a passion for they no longer can control what you see.

How To Get More Diggs

2008-06-12T08:36:00.002-07:00

I don't get around as much as I used to, but while searching for some topic to post, I ran into this article about How To Get More Diggs. Digging has become a phenomena of which I have become aware, but have little use for, however I do see how Digg could help out others. Hopefully in the days that follow, I'll analyze this Digg Phenomena and report more on it.

Morality: Why we need it!

2004-05-24T09:41:00.000-07:00

There is a universal morality in this world. This "Universal Morality" is a basic code of conduct that the vast majority of rational and responsible people use to govern behavior.

For example, we all should know that in our societies it is not legal to steal. No matter which country you are in, there are laws on stealing. It also is true that no matter which bonifide religon you belong to, they tell you stealing is wrong. The laws and teachings about stealing may not be the exact same, and some societies and religons may place more emphasis on stealing as being wrong more than others, but they all view the basic idea of stealing as wrong.

This Basic Morality holds true for the vast majority and it doesn't matter if you are from a Capitalist or Communist Nation, nor does it matter if you are from a Democratic Society or a Dictatorship. It also doesn't matter if you are religious or non-religious.

To be a moral person does not mean one has to be a religious fanatic or a crusader, it simply means one holds with the common morality from one degree to another. There is no crime or sin in being a moral person.

Morality is the leading cause for the world not being a place of total anarchy. Many of our laws are based on morality, and we ought to be glad for who loves to have something they worked hard for stolen by another - or who out there truly relishes the fact that they could be violated in some way? We may kid about such things, but in reality there are not many who will just blow-off having their homes robbed or their daughters molested.

To train our children with the very idea that everything is cool is wrong. It only serves to teach them that the result is the important thing and how you achieve it is unimportant. This, in turn, makes the world more uncaring and a more dangerous place.

Racists and Bigots

2004-04-25T11:58:00.000-07:00

Preface:

The Definition of Prejudice, which we are interested in, for the purposes of this entry is:

Prejudice: an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics

The Definition of Racism, which we are interested in, for the purpose of this entry is:

Racism: racial prejudice or discrimination Note: Racial means based on a race.

The Definition of Bigoty, which we are interested in, for the purposes of this entry is:

Bigotry: the acts or beliefs characteristic of a bigot Note: A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices

It is the rare person who can not be classified as a Racist or Bigot by someone, this opinion may derive from one's words or actions. If you are honest and sit down, with an open mind, and pay strict attention to the things you have said or done and you may even say "That was pretty prejudicial of me to do, say or think that!". This leaves the question of "Does this make me a Racist or Bigot?".

Even the most honest and fair of us will sometimes say or do things which are not exactly considered as Politically Correct. We may do it knowingly, or it may be caused by us not knowing that something we say is really Racist or Prejudicial by it's original intent. The original meaning of some things we have grown accustomed to saying have lost their original meaning over the years and have become acceptable to say.

Does it make the things we say, which may hurt another, right? The answer is No, but it also does not make the things we have grown accustomed to say wrong either. They often just are.

The real world is give and take, our rights work for all of us. Just as a person should be reasonably respectful of your rights, you should be reasonably respectful of theirs. This means we sometimes have to overlook somethings said or done for the common good, or the ability to try to get along. A person really should step outside our own personal boxes, which we created, and ask "Does this person intend any real malice by what he or she said?". Sometimes a pleasant discussion over ways of speaking will bring about some insight to such comments.

Out near Phoenix, a few years back, there was a place called "Spook Hill". History tells us that "Spook Hill" was named because back in the 1800s and early 1900s, the place was given the name because horses and cattle became "Spooked" or "Scared" whenever they went through the area. In the 90s a big push was to change the name, and it was brought out that "Spook" was a derogatory name for a Black Person. Even though this was true during the 60s and 70s in some parts of the eastern US, it was not true for the Phoenix Area back when the hill was named.

Discussions over the name caused some people to see the truth, however the ones with the agenda to change the name of the place pressed their message and caused the name-change to occur at the expense of the taxpayer. The only Racism and Bigotry in the name of Spook Hill was in the minds of those wishing to change the name of the hill.

This is an example of how even people claiming not to be racist can prove to be racist. Their prejudices overshadowed the facts of the case.

Another thing to think about is "Racial Profiling". Over the past couple decades we have been conditioned to think anything with the word "Race" applied to it is automatically wrong. Is it really? Stop and think. If you are beaten to a pulp by 3 white guys, do you really want to see a Black Man or Hispanic punished? Most people don't, they simply want to see the ones who did harm to them held liable for their crimes.

Now take the case of Muslim Terrorists. The US was attacked by Muslim Terrorists. Osama Bin Laden was shown to have admitted to being a part of this, as was the Al Quaida. Even if you don't believe this, an honest person can not disregard that Muslim Terrorists Groups threaten America and other countries with Terrorism. Now who should the Law Enforcement Agencies look for in their attempts to try to stop another 911? Should they bring in Chinese or Orientals and grill them about Muslim Terrorist Threats? Should Hispanics head the watch lists at our airport security checkpoints, just to allow Mid-eastern people breeze on by? You choose for yourself, but it does seem much wiser to keep an eye on the ones most liely to be the ones you are looking for.

When dealing with the concept of Racism and Bigotry, one needs to not submit to the emotional and think rationally. Not everything is as it seems, or as some group projects them to be. Sometimes our reactions to what we think is Racial and Bigotted only reflects our own particular brand of prejudice.

TarMac101

2004-04-18T21:59:00.000-07:00

This blog will contain a variety of things, I hope you enjoy it.