A Plan To Get Digg Stories Popular Again

[LibertyCzar]

We need at least 200 supporters to digg a story within an hour of it being posted. But we need to decide on a time of day to do this. It would be great if we could get at least one story made popular every day. Once a story has more than 200 diggs, it will be harder to bury. Also, we need to add comments to the digg stories. I'm not sure, but I think comments count toward the scoring on digg, and more comments help keep stories from being buried.

The poll attached to this thread lists 7 times in a day. Please vote on which time is most convenient for you. Once there are enough votes on this poll, we will know that we can implement this plan, and declare the Ron Paul hour on digg.

Also, we should post stories on political news and political opinion too, not just election 2008.

 

[DjLoTi]

Like your idea. It's going to take some type of orginazational effort on our behalf. It sucks, though, because it's not just Guilani people. It's Hillary, Obama, Fred, Mitt people... McCain people... lol.. But.. I like your idea.

 

[LibertyCzar]

I posted the poll

Also, I am open to certain times throughout the day in addition to the evening hours listed. But I usually log off the computer at 10:00 pm.

 

[DjLoTi]

I'm thinking something more like 2pm PST ... 7pm PST is already 11 on the east coast. I think we should shoot for something during the day...

 

[LibertyCzar]

You're right. The times should be converted to east coast time.

 

[torchbearer]

eastern or central

 

[LibertyCzar]

Eastern time zone. 6:00 pm to 7:00 pm should be 3:00 pm to 4:00 pacific time zone, and so forth. Sorry, about the bad choices. If this is too confusing, I can start over. If you want, we can all pick Other, and decide upon another convenient hour. The important thing is that we all are on Digg during the Ron Paul hour so we can protect the articles from the Bury Brigade. Geez, at the rate things are going, I'm wondering if another article will ever become popular again.

 

[DjLoTi]

*silly chuckle*

 

[quickmike]

no offense.........

No offense, but dont you think our time would be better spent going out in the real world concentrating our efforts to educate people by setting up booths, handing out pamphlets, talking to neighbors and just generaly spreading the word, instead of "dickin" around on websites trying to get the virtual message out? I know its important that we use the internet to spread the word as well, but to just digg up stories for the sake of digging them up for some magic number or rating is not going to help get the word out to people who dont use the internet. What id like to see more of on here are stories and ideas of how we are getting out there campaining for Ron, instead of just voting on internet polls and digging stories that wont translate into real votes come primaries day. If people want to use the internet to learn about ron paul, they will surely go to his website and youtube to watch him speak. Lets get out there and do some real hitting the sidewalks, and knocking on doors. Just imagine if we all spent our energy and time doing that, and waking up the neighbors. We would quickly multiply the offline supporters, and by doing that we might even get them out there themselves doing the same. Thats how real grassroots success happens.

Im not trying to bitch too much, but come on guys......... lets get real about this.

 

[DjLoTi]

Naa Mike, I think you have a point there...

 

[tsoldrin]

If you really want to attempt to game the system like that, it would be much easier to simply maintain an rss feed with all the posted articles and then use an rss reader, email alert or web page/blog widget to update as articles are posted, perhaps with a little 'ding' sound as new ones come in. It woud be fairly easy to accomplish simply by splicing the already available feeds of the most active Ron Paul diggers into one larger feed and then everyone could use one of the above mentioned methods of getting the feed/alerts as they come in.

Personally, I think the better option is simply getting more Ron Paul supporters on digg and active. If there were an overwhelming number, then you wouldn't really even have to bother with any of the details, things would just work out on their own. That way, everyone wins... including digg, by increasing their userbase.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I agree with Mike. We need to get out in the real world, but while doing so, conduct ourselves in a manner that would make Dr. Paul proud.

I also think we need to lay off of Digg. We are pissing people off by making nearly the entire front page of Digg all about Ron Paul. People are also getting tired of seeing their message boards spammed by a bunch of new Ron Paul supporters that came over from one purpose and one purpose only, to comment on an article, or guest appearance.

As a guy who made a video blog on this said.... we are creating our own BLOWBACK situation. We don't need any others, beyond the others that we already have to overcome.

 

[LibertyCzar]

I agree that we shouldn't repeat stories. But come on, other people have just as much of an opportunity to post about their own favorite candidate. Look how many articles have been digged enough to become popular in the last week. The point is that these people are deliberately burying stuff just because it has the name Ron Paul on it.

I do agree, however, that there are sometimes too many Ron Paul stories on Digg in the upcoming stories, but if we can get just a couple made popular a day, I think that is okay. As it is, they all seem to be buried now. I also think that once stories become popular again, the total amount of posted stories might diminish somewhat in favor of commenting on the stories that have been made popular.

Also, I agree that we should do campaigning off the internet as well as on. But I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can certainly come up with 200 supporters to digg a story each day, without putting a dent into any other aspect of the campaign.

 

[cujothekitten]

We could add a RSS feed to this forum can't we? I've seen them on other sites... like at the top or the bottom of the page.

 

[LibertyCzar]

We could also post something here on this forum first, and if it gets enough positive attention, then we can send it on to Digg. Maybe the poster can include a simple poll asking if we want to see the particular story on Digg or not. Maybe a Sticky could be made specifically for Digg.

 

[cujothekitten]

We could also post something here on this forum first, and if it gets enough positive attention, then we can send it on to Digg. Maybe the poster can include a simple poll asking if we want to see the particular story on Digg or not. Maybe a Sticky could be made specifically for Digg.

Yeah I like that idea as well... that way we can centralize the articles and really work to get the good ones up.

 

[LibertyCzar]

Just because something has been covered by multiple sources doesn't mean it needs to appear on Digg in all its forms. I do agree that this is a form of spamming. For example, if Ron Paul attends a rally and that rally is covered by the New York Times, USA Today, Washington Post, Time Magazine, Los Angeles Times, Fox News, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, and MSNBC, that doesn't mean we should put this reported rally on Digg ten times for each sources. We don't want to Digg the sources, we want to Digg the underlying event and story. The important thing is that we let others know what is going on and to spread the word.

 

[DjLoTi]

There is currently a pro-Ron Paul story on the top list of digg right now

 

[UCFGavin]

I think Digg should only be used for important stories.

 

[UtahApocalypse]

I will simply reference this thread about digg.....

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=847