Even Digg isn’t immune to the Digg Effect

by: Randall McCarley
What would happen if Digg had a story that was so crazy popular it got over 16,000 votes in less than 20 hours? Now, what if that story leaked proprietary information and the folks at Digg got a cease and desist order? Now what if someone resubmitted the article? And that story got over 15,000 votes in 15 hours?

Digg is in a state of open revolt right now.
The controversy began when someone posted the 32 bit hex code that is used to encrypt HD DVDs. This code can be used to make copies of commercial DVDs. The Advanced Access Content System Licensing Administrator LLC sent Digg a C&D so Digg removed the story which was quickly reposted.

This is where things went wrong. Instead of explaining the situation, Digg admins deleted the stories relating to the issue and banned the account holders who submitted the stories. The controversy that ensued is still moving with hundreds of blogs and forums now commenting on the disaster. The issue at hand is not whether or not it was ok to post the HD DVD hex code but rather who is in control of user-generated websites: the site owner or the users that make it work.

Jay Adelson posted an explanation of Digg’s stance on the Digg Blog this afternoon — too little, too late. And missing the point - users don’t like heavy-handed tactics and banning accounts should be a last resort, not a preventive measure (as learned a while ago at another user-generated content site).

Ironically, Jay made this point:

“we all need to work together to protect Digg from exposure to lawsuits that could very quickly shut us down”

Digg and the Digg Mirror have both been down several times throughout the night. Currently, every story on the Digg homepage is about the HD DVD code or the controversy around how Digg handled the situation.

Update: Founder of Digg, Kevin Rose
http://www.14thc.com/?p=135