Comments on: Reader opinion on Stumble and Digg

By: In retrospect - 2007 in review | Chris Bloczynski dot Com

In retrospect - 2007 in review | Chris Bloczynski dot Com — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:22:47 +0000

[…] Reader opinion on Stumble and Digg (9 comments) […]

By: rk

rk — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:57:58 +0000

1. I pretty much agree with Lewis: the content is key. If someone has a post they are proud of, let’s see it.

2. If you can’t filter out an affiliate link or two, you should probably close your browser. A gaggle of links is a problem.

3. A group of like-minded entrepreneurs is as worthy a clique as a bunch of myspace buds, in my book.

On a related note, your social sharing icons are one of the nicest (unobtrusive) implementations I’ve seen. I’ll try to keep it from showing up on my blog

By: TONY

TONY — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 09:45:51 +0000

Hi,
1.I am managing a blog which is regarding stock market Technical Analysis made Easy.
2.In my initial days of startup I did request people to promote my posts but when the world community came to know of quality posts, I need not undertake this practice.
3.Long live “content” as its quality makes a blog worth reading once it has been widely publicised.

By: KAVITA

KAVITA — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:19:22 +0000

1.I will first of all compliment for a neat and clean layout of the site.
2.I do have asked my acquaitances to promote my pillar articles in case they feel its the worth its salt for the world community.
3.So one can consider digging my work by visiting my blog for getting genuine and researched Stock Market Tips and Money Making Ideas From Websites Which pays.
Regards

By: Jerry Gartner

Jerry Gartner — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 13:12:35 +0000

Well, when I digg and Stumble my own articles, I refer to it as seeding. I don’t think it’s cheating because if you want something to grow, you have to plant a seed. If the conditions are good for growing, you’ll have little problems. On the other hand, if the conditions are bad, no growth (hits). Seeding http://rackit.gartnerwebdev.com/2007/08/28/ready-for-a-new-k-an-inside-look-at-kde-40/ , for example, resulted in 10,079 uniques from digg and 974 uniques from Stumble from August 29th 2007 through September 1st 2007 (as of 800 am CDT) - popular topic, btw, and also largely due to my fortune in getting a hot interview. The amount of diggs is not commensurate with traffic generated either . I’ve had 3000 uniques correlating with 750 diggs while the 10K uniques just broke 500 this morning. I’m pretty sure that they would’ve gotten dugg or stumbled anyway, but it’s kind of like a tip jar. If you stick a few bucks in it at the beginning of your shift, you tend to do better than if your first few customers see an empty jar. Diggers tend to visit the dugg permalink and not much else and tend to use the digg comments for comments instead of the site comments - lower advert clickouts too. This behavior is also indicative of the digg topic - some stay longer and do more than others. Stumblers tend to stay on the site longer and read other posts as well. They also leave more comments and clickout on ads (yay!) So: 1.) I don’t think it’s bad form. 2.) If the post is good, ads don’t matter - most of us are in this to make a few extra bucks anyway. 3.) Unless you get a lot of diggs in a short amount of time, the digg won’t go viral. You’ll want at least 20 diggs in literally a few minutes (I don’t know the digg algorithm - this is my best guess) to get front page. My wife and I seed each other all the time. It’s more ritual than practical though.

By: Calvin Warr

Calvin Warr — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 05:59:17 +0000

Well, the whole purpose of Stumbling or Digg is to share interesting information. If you do not think your own information is interesting enough to share, why should others? In other words, why not Stumble or Digg your own post if you feel strongly about sharing them?

Now, if you Stumble or Digg your own post with affiliate links, that might not be too nice. But again, if you truly believe this will save the whales, well, to each his own.

Stumble/Digg groups… hmmm… I thought they were frowned upon by them and could potentially get your account banned?

By: Lewis Empire

Lewis Empire — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 06:24:36 +0000

1)I don’t have a problem with people posting their own material onto any of the sites out there; Digg, Stumble, etc.

As a blogger, my main goal is to 1)publish consistent high-quality content 2)develop a loyal readership 3)monetize my site (in that order). I see all these sites as platforms to promote your work.

When I read postings from other bloggers, I usually click on a title that attracts my attention then, if the article looks interesting, I will read the whole thing. The person who Dugg or Stumbled the article has little to do with the value that I get from a great post.

I’d rather read a well thought article that a blogger posted him/her self than a poorly written article by a blogger with a large readership.

2)Give me quality. Affiliates don’t matter as long as I haven’t been mislead in the first place.

3)I love the idea. Let me know if anyone is interested by sending me an email through my contact page at LewisEmpire.com.

By: dcr

dcr — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:08:27 +0000

1. Yes. No.

2. I haven’t paid attention to affiliate links or ads, etc. I just pay attention to the post. Now, if the post is low-quality or designed solely to drive traffic to the affiliate link, then that Stumbler loses some credibility.

3. I think it’s okay, so long as it meets a certain quality threshold. I mean, I wouldn’t expect (or want!) anyone to Stumble any of my “side dish” posts. I’d rather only be dugg or stumbled for the meaty posts.

By: Vincent

Vincent — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:52:00 +0000

Personally, I think Stumbling and Digging are user/reader initiated, so doing it on my own articles feels like cheating.

As for affiliate links, it depends on the appropriateness of it.

And Stumble and Digg groups? Perhaps as a starting point for gathering momentum. I’ve seen articles with 1000+ Diggs. They’ve got to start somewhere, right? Unless the group is 1000+ strong…