This Story is Archived
Kevin Rose challenges Calacanis on paid social bookmarking »
Posted by: Dygital 2 years, 2 months agoDigg co-funder Kevin Rose goes on a massive attack of Calacanis' plans to hire a dozen top social bookmarkers, but he doesn't seem to have a point about it. I'd actually be interested in hearing what he thinks about paying folks to do social bookmarking, but instead he just personally attacks me. 'Scaped.
Read Full Story at calacanis.com »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 33
-
sunchild
July 25, 2006, 10:36 p.m.Wow, this site is pathetic. This is my first visit and I'm shocked to see what a sad copy of Digg it is. Not only is the interface horrible, but the content is absurd--two stories on crackpot 9/11 conspiracy theories on the front page?! This little time-and-money-waster isn't gonna drag Netscape out of its hole. As for Calacanis, Kevin Rose should respond with two words: Silicon Alley...hahahahahaha! Honestly, though, if engaging Calacanis on this level brought me over to this pathetic site, I guess it is good PR. I mean, Jason can count me as one more "registered user" since I registered to post this comment. On a pageview basis, I probably reload digg at least 100 times a day. I doubt I'll ever be back here. Big, huge MEH.
-
ARealPatriot
July 25, 2006, 11:52 p.m.Im against paying digg people to come here too - they'd ruin the place just like they did digg (well they and the people who run digg ruined it).
Unfortunately, the highly censored nature of digg (not user - but admin censored), combined with the social cliques that have formed to promote friends stories, have turned digg into an incestuous little cesspool of a few peoples garbage.
Netscape may have copied the idea but its still a far better site, mainly because you dont have to worry about your account mysteriously being banned just because you asked why a 5 hour old story with 3 diggs was on the homepage, but a 2 hour old story with 200 diggs isnt. Or some other question or post that some admin over there didnt like.
That said, I have to admit that by comparison, netscape is slow, buggy, UGLY - and their insistence of putting web-links in frames is just stupid. But like I said, at least I can make that critisism here without getting banned.
digg is the suck!11!!!1one!! ;-)
-
brettodactyl
July 25, 2006, 11:55 p.m.Jason, I think you're idea of paying the top posters is really innovative, and I look forward to hearing more about it as people sign up to do this. I think it's really a shame that Kevin Rose would resort to personal attacks, rather than defending his position based on evidence.
Keep up the good work on the site. Netscape has been my homepage almost from the time I started using the Internet, and it will probably always be my homepage.
-
outside
July 26, 2006, 12:37 a.m.I think you're idea of employing netscape shills is top notch! I mean developing a community oriented site and then have netscape underlings submit stories, wow how awesome! I can't wait to be able to read all the news from the associated press! Boy it sure was innovative for you to think this up! I'm so glad you thought of this first, and not some other site like those guys at reddit and digg. Nope it was all you, you just began that bandwagon, jumped on the trolley, first to sing, started the wave... Just you being so innovative, with the story submissions, and the voting, and the comments, and the interface, and the comment voting... yup you though that all up by yourself. Good job!
This will totally become my portal page, cause I love the late 90's feel. And how 1/3 of the posters are netscape plants, its so comfortable inside this house of cards, in my netscape bubble where I'm told what the community chooses by the administration. Can I have some kool-aid now?
-
josue-salazar
July 26, 2006, 1:02 a.m.Kevin does have a point guys, it's going to take a whole lot more than submitters to get this site off of everyone's jokes. We need more users actually using the site.
As for the guy who mentioned digg is faster and nicer etc., I have to tell him I completely disagree. I think netscape is the one who actually has a nice design and I feel Netscape is faster to load.
Also, I have to say I like the anchor's picks here, but they need to updated them daily.
-
eplawless
July 26, 2006, 2:58 a.m.Digg, censored? How about Netscape is censored? Stories I have submitted about multiple vulnerabilities in this site have been taken off the front page, instead of heeded and fixed. Kevin Rose ****** your mother, Netscape. He ****** her right in the anus.
-
Lalagrande
July 26, 2006, 3:33 a.m.It's absolutely not copying. Ever since the first bubble, it's been quite obvious that the early bird doesn't always catch the worm. Netscape is a bigger player, and it is making an obvious power play.
We'll see how it turns out. The payment model isn't a bad idea, for those of us who contribute for hours of our day.
-
mateo600
July 26, 2006, 3:53 a.m.Digg= grassroots site with a large but very loyal following
Netscape= A once great company who recently failed by throwing millions of dollars marketing a dial-up ISP (which is viewed mostly by people like my grandma who can't change their homepage) who is desperately trying another scheme....... maybe try a pyramid scheme??
I wonder if most of the Netscape users that are signed up (besides all of the planted corporate lackeys of course) are people like me who are Digg users, but came to see the trainwreck?
-
Dygital
July 26, 2006, 8:19 a.m.What will the top Digg users do, when Kevin Rose sells the site off to Yahoo? Then what? Yahoo will make about 10x as much as Rose, and then what...?
Good intuitive Jason to look at the big picture. Nice idea to offer some compensation to your top users. Whether or not they migrate from other sites, Netscape can become very big.
-
Stephen_13
July 26, 2006, 8:28 a.m.This site is pathetic. Jason is pathetic. I can't beleive that some people actually like this site. Like sunchild, I just registered to post this, and will never return...
For one thing, there is no admin control or censoring at digg. Second, this Jason guy is basically saying "Netscape users don't post any good content, so I'll have to buy some better users from better sites".
This site is such a rip off... It might have been OK if they had come up with an original design, and maybe actually have some features that Digg didn't have about three years ago...
I would be isulted by the idea of the creator of this site buying better users if I used it.
One other thing, I doubt that Kevin Rose will sell Digg. He knows as much as the users that if the site was owned by a big corporation (like yahoo) it would become as bad as this site.
-
mahesh67
July 26, 2006, 9:16 a.m.Hey, let's give Jason some credit. His ability to ignore criticism is impressive.
The idea of "Kevin Rose getting $10 million" by ripping off the social bookmarkers is a tough argument to frame. He didn't "rip people off" by building a usable site.
-
rjdohnert
July 26, 2006, 10:29 a.m.Paying Digg people to come here is not a good idea. Im not against paying social bookmarkers but why not concentrate on people who are already members. As for Kevin Rose and Digg, I personally dont read it anymore and I have better things to do then watch a washed up Tech Show host HAK, try to play reporter. As for Netscapes readership, I have been here since the first day the new Netscape rolled out and posts are going from 1 to 10 to 25 votes, some are getting over a hundred now. I personally think that Netscape delivers more useful content.
-
ck
July 26, 2006, 11:29 a.m.Everyone who is against this idea is misreading Jason's pitch and oversimplifying what our goal with this is. We're not interested in all these silly Netscape vs. Digg conversations. We're only interested in making Netscape the best experience it can be.
We're not paying the top Digg users to come here. We're looking for some of the top social bookmarkers out there (on Digg, Reddit, Del.icio.us, Newsvine, etc.) to highlight as cool-hunters who know how to find cool stories. We're interviewing them all on the phone and finding people who will be good fits and have a positive attitude towards making Netscape a positive experience. Our goal is to help everyone, not just the tech savvy amongst us, to find cool stories and interesting information on the Internet. If people get paid to do something they enjoy doing in the process, then where's the harm in that?
-
alexrudloff
July 26, 2006, 12:11 p.m.There is no harm. It's just a bunch of ******y pants from the digg crowd.
-
DrDash
July 26, 2006, 12:23 p.m.It odd how this is turning so personal between them. And why is Rose not blasting all the other site like these? I for one actually like both these guys, Rose and Jason. I just dont know why Digg (and thier users) are all blasting Netscape? Netscape is not the only other one out there with similiar structure to Digg. If you prefer Digg, go use it, Like Netscape, use it... done.
-
ctbfourone
July 26, 2006, 12:42 p.m.Categorizing Kevin's blog post as a "massive attack" is blowing things way out of proportion. WAY out of proportion.
Kevin's been very obvious in the public eye that he thinks the new Netscape sucks. Okay fine, we get it. No need to rehash it yet again, Kev.
Jason however is smartly using that against Kevin, and also leveraging it as a vehicle to promote some of Netscape's strategy. What better way to help advertise the fact that you will PAY people to post on your news site!
But, as Leo Laporte said, this is getting way too much attention. Let's move along people...
-
BruiserTom
July 26, 2006, 1:01 p.m.It's a pretty old self-serving argument. The person who is making all the money offers an altruistic reason why he should continue to make all the money and the people who don't make any money should continue to do what they are doing without pay just out of love and the kindness of their hearts because it is good for their characters. Then the guy who is making all the money will claim that he should make even more money, because he has so improved the characters of those who don't make any money. Of course, it doesn't hurt HIS character to make money, because he is so above being corrupted by it - unlike the hoi polloi beneath him.
-
dwizzle378
July 26, 2006, 3:47 p.m.Just like Stephen13, "This site is pathetic. Jason is pathetic" I too will never be back. Digg=good, Netscape= horrible almost Yigg-like copy. It's also very buggy, slow, and looks ugly.
-
-
greggish
July 26, 2006, 6:54 p.m.I think Kevin Rose is upset because Netscape has shown how easy it is to throw up a News Bulletin Board, which is all Digg and Netscape really are. Now how is Kevin going to convince Yahoo to pay $100+ mil for his online bulletin board?
-
Uglymike
July 26, 2006, 7:47 p.m."Netscape will survive along with Digg", survive like the bastard red headded step son of Digg. Burn in hell Calacanis! Just like dwizzle378 and Stephen13 before me, I would like to quote "This site is pathetic. Jason is pathetic". Sums it up nicely. I will be back, only to watch the train wreck and to see the top voted story still in double figures. YAWN. Time for my Digg wake up after the 'scape downer.
-
greggish
July 26, 2006, 8:08 p.m.These Digg fanatics are a little loopy. Digg was not this groundbreaking original idea, just a better implementation of a freakin bulletin board as a way of sorting and discussing news. Get over it. Why does it bother people who use Digg that there are competitors... its a good thing. Why do you care if Kevin has a harder time selling out to Yahoo for less than he dreamed. Don't get me wrong, I like Digg, but actually Netscape has done it a little better, and the community, although smaller at this point, doesn't have that crazy fanatic cult feel that has seem to taken over at Digg. They're all upset that anybody should dare challenge or humiliate their "Dear Leader" Mr. Rose.
-
-
shogunu
July 26, 2006, 9:40 p.m.In response to the digg crowd flaming Netscape,
I am a digg user and i will use Netscape from now for non-tech news.
Main advantages for me are the better design (except for that top ad which really seems out of context), better content, mature(er) users (only half of the comments on the "crackpot 9/11 conspiracy theories" are from wackos, comparing to the 10:1 wacko to sane ratio on digg), a more robust social networking (the "Do You Know?" tab on my settings page is really neat, also the "Members who voted for this story also voted on…" feature is a good addition which i use) and plus it is faster than digg (maybe because Netscape actually has money to spend on bandwidth & servers :D).
My main gripes with Netscape are the lack of threading comments (think Slashdot), and the comment spell checker (really useful for non-native English speakers and even for some native ones too).
Just my 0.02$
-
paryunu
May 14, 2007, 12:02 p.m.I worked for what was the biggest "forum" dotcom-- not so different than user submitted. We could never think of PAYING the mega contributers. It was a big hobby for them. BUT, also true that we went out of biz! (was #150 on media matrix)
The first 25 comments are shown. Show all 33 comments »
Got a Story?
