Digg Overtakes Facebook with 1400% Growth, 22.6 Million Uniques(dcurt.is)
dcurt.is
Digg Overtakes Facebook with 1400% Growth, 22.6 Million Uniques
http://dcurt.is/digg-overtakes-facebook-with-1400-growth-226-million-uniques
14 comments
It's a fun exercise, but we all know how reliable Compete is for quantitative traffic comparisons. For example, Compete currently claims Reddit (http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/) has less traffic than Digg (http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/).
I sincerely doubt Digg surpassed Facebook's traffic at any point in the company's lifetime.
I sincerely doubt Digg surpassed Facebook's traffic at any point in the company's lifetime.
Compete just makes numbers up. Those uniques are so far off for reddit it isn't even funny.
That's a very strong claim. What evidence do you have for it?
He used to work there. He knew the real traffic numbers.
Probably that whole "being one of the original members of the Reddit team" thing.
But, you know, I could be wrong.
But, you know, I could be wrong.
Ah, yes, thanks, that isn't obvious. No need to be snotty about it.
His HN profile immediately talks about running Reddit's servers. And he's using the same recognizable username. I don't know how more obvious it could have been.
Why would you check someone's profile?
Because in general when someone says something similar you background check their profile to see if they're for real or a crazy.
Why did you let the reddit community turn to shit?
Google "experts misunderestimate"
Is anyone else hoping to read the same article in 5 years but about Facebook?
that guy using diaspora (I've heard of him, he must exist somewhere)
<something funny about google plus here>
It's a crazy world out there, kids:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1850428
Try not to let it bother you too much.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1850428
Try not to let it bother you too much.
This re-emphasizes one of my own personal rules of entrepreneurship: when someone offers you a FU money exit, and you don't already have FU money, you take it. You take it and walk. Because if you don't, you might regret it, and who knows what the future will bring. After you reach FU money, it's not like you can't go and try building another new product/service/website/gadget again -- you can, except you'll be starting from a much safer and happier place, with more resources, connections, eyeballs, etc.
I think Kevin Rose is doing OK. He has FU money.
Sic transit gloria lacinia felis.
Wasn't it the redesign that started the avalanche of people leaving?
Or am I mistaken? Maybe if they had just left it alone and did gradual tweaks instead...
Or am I mistaken? Maybe if they had just left it alone and did gradual tweaks instead...
No maybe about it. Digg lost their market by messing with their product. It's an interesting case, because you can make a direct comparison with reddit: two nearly identical products serving the same market started at the same time. Digg tried to grow too fast and failed, reddit grew at its natural pace and succeeded.
I don't know... I was part of a big migration to reddit around 2008-2009.
I remember there being tons of threads on Reddit of ex-diggers making fun of Digg around then. There were frequent posts daily about the complete degradation of quality on Digg back then.
The running joke was all the posts on Digg's current frontpage were from Reddits frontpage yesterday.
The redesign (in 2010) was the nail in the coffin.
I remember there being tons of threads on Reddit of ex-diggers making fun of Digg around then. There were frequent posts daily about the complete degradation of quality on Digg back then.
The running joke was all the posts on Digg's current frontpage were from Reddits frontpage yesterday.
The redesign (in 2010) was the nail in the coffin.
I was on reddit for a couple years before that. The jokes about digg's quality certainly didn't begin in 2008.
More recent data shows nosedive:
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/
In the blink of an eye, in internet years.
What a total BS blog post with no real data
Really? In which parallel universe?
As I see it the basic problem was one of name. Who wants to be a digger? It sounds fancy pants to be a redditor.
Fascinating to see Digg coming back from the grave, so to speak. I didn't see this coming.
Er... Fascinating to see such an old article come up on Hackernews without the age of the article in parenthesis.
That's a derp.
Er... Fascinating to see such an old article come up on Hackernews without the age of the article in parenthesis.
That's a derp.
Richard Macmanus, at ReadWriteWeb, on June 20th, 2007:The article submitted to HN is new. But in it he quoted a 2007 article.
The slogan of his blog speaks for itself ...
Ehhh...what?
Go ahead. Rub it in.
Since I ended up reading the article, I have to wonder if Compete counted Digg buttons on blogs as visits. Facebook, of course, did not even get a Share/Like button until 2.5 years later in late 2009 (http://mashable.com/2009/10/26/facebook-share-buttons/) It would be easy to get millions of daily uniques if popular newspapers all request your script or image in every article, and sites like Compete don't properly take social buttons into account.
(It's interesting that recent articles have debated if Facebook itself now counts the display or click of a Like button as a visit.)