So... A response to my last article: Digg vs. Slashdot: A Comparison article seemed to be better-suited to Digg. I would have thought it better to Slashdot.

But what I found most interesting about getting that article on Digg was that, in the end, all the response I got to the article seemed to match perfectly my stereotyping of Digg: That is, no continutity in comments, no useful conversation, and no sense of community. All in all, it appears that everyone on Digg doesn't seem to be capable of understanding that article. One really good response came out of that post - and, of course, it wasn't on Digg. This article "Why Digg sucks... and how it could be better" sums up basically everything I didn't say, and that was how to go about improving Digg: And that is to put up a comment system that supports conversation, so that you can see which conversations are replies and which ones aren't.

For some eight years, Slashdot has been the most well known provider of News for Nerds. I doubt that anyone would disagree with me if I said it wasn't well deserved. The editors of Slashdot know well their target audience, and (for some strange reason), they know which articles tend to fit into the site well and which ones don't. Digg (pushed heavily by Kevin Rose, formerly of TechTV), is a newcomer to the world, but has still managed to become a formidable force in terms of the number of visitors it is able to pull to the sites it promotes. I recall hearing on an episode of TWiT that Kevin hoped to outdo Slashdot at some point in time. So, it makes sense that they should be compared.