Algorithms & Digg titles, say what?
This post was published 2 years 11 months 13 days ago which may make its actuality or expire date not be valid anymore. This site is not responsible for any misunderstanding.Feelings and emotions are mixed when topics shift to the real value of Digg. Feel free to use our comments to share your own feelings. However, regardless of how you do feel towards the service, the truth is that any link that makes it to the Popular page guarantees a website incredible waves of traffic. Whether or not this type of hit-n-run traffic is of any value is for you to decide.
Everyone knows that one of the strongest assets a blog post or Digg entry has is its title. Read a captivating or enticing title, you automatically let curiousness get the best of you and you click-through. Read a boring, mundane, no effort title… You could care less about whatever it is is being linked.
So how do you hone your title writing skills? Do you study the submission patterns on Digg? Do you interpret what posts received the most clicks on your own blog based on the attitude conveyed through the title? Or, do you plug your fascinating / pathetic title into an application which generates a title using fancy algorithms?
Is this taking the allure of Digg too far? A standalone application which tests the changes of your submission title making it to the front page? Has a tiny application managed to factor in the natural inquisitive nature of the general Digg user accurately enough to compute the likelihood of your post gaining popularity? You decide.
Take any news article, add in a little nerd sub-culture, a dash of pop culture and a pinch of left wing common sense, and you have a title Digg will eat up like good ol American Apple Pie. Know your audience…
Left wing common sense, is that an oxymoron?
Yeah, it’s an oxymoron, if by oxymoron you mean redundant.
curiousness? Itness notness aness wordness.
The correct word is curiosityness.
Left-wing commonsense is hardly an oxymoron. Wingernut commonsense is certainly a contradiction. At this point, I think we’ve had plenty of wingernut commonsense to last us a lifetime. Wingernut commonsense is invading the country not responsible for Sep 11. Wingernut commonsense is invading a country without a clue as to what was to happen next. Wingernut commonsense is to declare war on a method. Wingernut commonsense is to declare mission accomplished at the beginning of a mission. Wingernut commonsense is to award a silver star to somone whose heroism involved defense against friendly fire.
Will wingernuts please stop with their commonsense already? It’s deadly.
hmmm I think I figured it out!
” TOP {NUMBER} ___FILL IN BLANK___ [SOFTWARE/FACTS/IMAGES/SEX] [YOU DIDN'T/YOU SHOULD] KNOW ABOUT”
…. Digg.com … we fucking love lists
nuff said… myself and Digg have a very strong love/hate relationship.