<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Digg to Repair Holes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://twopointouch.com/2006/social-media/digg-to-repair-holes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://twopointouch.com/2006/social-media/digg-to-repair-holes/</link>
	<description>web 2.0, blogs and social media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 00:12:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wisdom and Intelligence at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</title>
		<link>http://twopointouch.com/2006/social-media/digg-to-repair-holes/#comment-3935</link>
		<dc:creator>Wisdom and Intelligence at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twopointouch.com/2006/09/07/digg-to-repair-holes/#comment-3935</guid>
		<description>[...] [**Actually, digg is interesting in this regard. The submission of stories is not anonymous, nor is the voting. This has led to lots of accusations of bloc voting, allegations of a self-reinforcing elite of top diggers, and adjustments to the promotion algorithm to try to prevent this. It is a strange amalgam of social community and wise-crowds news aggregator. The owners (and presumably enough of the users) want it that way. If the owners didn&#8217;t want the social community aspect, and the problems that has created, they&#8217;d remove all mention of user names and make voting anonymous. It&#8217;s my belief that the gaming aspect to digg is entirely intentional and part of what appears to make it so addictive to its fans.]    Filed under web 2.0, social software, opinions and social news.&#160;&#160;&#124; Tags: collective intelligence, digg, web 2.0, wikipedia, wisdom.      var blogTool = &quot;WordPress&quot;; var blogURL = &quot;http://twopointouch.com&quot;; var blogTitle = &quot;twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media&quot;; var postURL = &quot;http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/27/wisdom-and-intelligence/&quot;; var postTitle = &quot;Wisdom and Intelligence&quot;; var commentAuthorFieldName = &quot;author&quot;; var commentAuthorLoggedIn = false; var commentFormID = &quot;commentform&quot;; var commentTextFieldName = &quot;comment&quot;; var commentButtonName = &quot;submit&quot;; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] [**Actually, digg is interesting in this regard. The submission of stories is not anonymous, nor is the voting. This has led to lots of accusations of bloc voting, allegations of a self-reinforcing elite of top diggers, and adjustments to the promotion algorithm to try to prevent this. It is a strange amalgam of social community and wise-crowds news aggregator. The owners (and presumably enough of the users) want it that way. If the owners didn&#8217;t want the social community aspect, and the problems that has created, they&#8217;d remove all mention of user names and make voting anonymous. It&#8217;s my belief that the gaming aspect to digg is entirely intentional and part of what appears to make it so addictive to its fans.]    Filed under web 2.0, social software, opinions and social news.&nbsp;&nbsp;| Tags: collective intelligence, digg, web 2.0, wikipedia, wisdom.      var blogTool = &#8220;WordPress&#8221;; var blogURL = &#8220;http://twopointouch.com&#8221;; var blogTitle = &#8220;twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media&#8221;; var postURL = &#8220;http://twopointouch.com/2006/11/27/wisdom-and-intelligence/&#8221;; var postTitle = &#8220;Wisdom and Intelligence&#8221;; var commentAuthorFieldName = &#8220;author&#8221;; var commentAuthorLoggedIn = false; var commentFormID = &#8220;commentform&#8221;; var commentTextFieldName = &#8220;comment&#8221;; var commentButtonName = &#8220;submit&#8221;; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Three Cheers for Twonks at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</title>
		<link>http://twopointouch.com/2006/social-media/digg-to-repair-holes/#comment-523</link>
		<dc:creator>Three Cheers for Twonks at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2006 10:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twopointouch.com/2006/09/07/digg-to-repair-holes/#comment-523</guid>
		<description>[...] I don&#8217;t think that even the proudest champion of Web 2.0 would claim that either of these sites are without problems. A lot of them are admitted by their owners, and have been covered here in earlier posts. The thing is, they are also quite good as they are, and are continuously evolving to become better. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I don&#8217;t think that even the proudest champion of Web 2.0 would claim that either of these sites are without problems. A lot of them are admitted by their owners, and have been covered here in earlier posts. The thing is, they are also quite good as they are, and are continuously evolving to become better. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How to Make a Wise Crowd at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</title>
		<link>http://twopointouch.com/2006/social-media/digg-to-repair-holes/#comment-432</link>
		<dc:creator>How to Make a Wise Crowd at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twopointouch.com/2006/09/07/digg-to-repair-holes/#comment-432</guid>
		<description>[...] USA Today takes a pop at internet techies citing the Wisdom of Crowds, suggesting that the recent digg and wikipedia controversies may show the idea is fallacious. David Freedman takes another swipe in &#8216;What&#8217;s Next: The Idiocy of Crowds&#8216; published at Inc.com, saying that on the internet, &#8220;the scum tends to rise to the top&#8221;. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] USA Today takes a pop at internet techies citing the Wisdom of Crowds, suggesting that the recent digg and wikipedia controversies may show the idea is fallacious. David Freedman takes another swipe in &#8216;What&#8217;s Next: The Idiocy of Crowds&#8216; published at Inc.com, saying that on the internet, &#8220;the scum tends to rise to the top&#8221;. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
