How to get to the digg homepage

[math20]

What are some tips in title/description writing that helped you get to the homepage?

[ArcticPro]

You got to find tons of people to digg you and have a great article. Not just any article is going to get people to digg it. I wrote an article about promoting websites and it got dug by a lot of people and I was surprised, lol.

[usedmac]

If the article is news worthy it will get Dugg. That is the beauty of Digg the users decide which articles are relevent.

[shabda]

But how does it get started. If you have a great article, Once you get to digg home it will stay but what to start the diggs?

[ly2]

If it's interesting, it will get dugg.

There are no "secrets".

Interesting and cool = front page
Lame and boring = wont make front page

And don't bother trying to beg for diggs, it wont happen like that. Even if it does, people will bury the site so fast it's not even going to be worth the effort.

[EGS]

Oh at Digg you actually have to write the articles? :eek: I thought you just linked to your site which contained the article, no? :p

[Jamie Lister]

Well I added my digg link to my sig below under "latest article".
I thought it was a bit tacky to make a thread asking people to digg me so I found this a more subtle way of promoting my hard work.

Other than that I see its very hard work to compete for the front page with the tons of other submitters.

[Obelia]

I don't think there's much point in trying to promote anything on Digg that doesn't appeal to the tech crowd. Most of the stuff on the homepage is IT related, or funny. So the most obvious tip is, keep it on-topic.

[Jamie Lister]

Yes Obelia, and so it says.
But i invite you to have a look at the front-pagers today...not much tech there.
This was my first experience with digg and it got nowhere. It seems that you either have friends in the digg community or its pointless to submit - I must have had 70-100 visitors from my article.
Plus most of what's "published" there is pure crap and can hardly be called articles...

[Jenstar]

I was dugg, and I didn't realize it until a couple days later when I checked the logs, so you can easily be dugg without even knowing it and I don't think I know who submitted it. But I did have many more than just 70-100 visitors from it. However, it wasn't nearly to the same levels as a /. is. Like anything else, I think it depends then on the interest level of the visitors to Digg to see what the resulting traffic is.

[DomainWorks]

How to get to the Digg front page? Apparently a lot of folks have been doing it by gaming the system (http://diggtheblog.blogspot.com/2006/04/digging-fraud.html) through multiple fake accounts. They've just closed a bunch of accounts and banned links to ForeverGeek.com (sparking an interesting flame war (http://forevergeek.com/news/digg_corrupted_editors_playground_not_userdriven_website.php) between the two sites).

Hey Jenstar, love your site! I've also had sites completely hammered by Slashdot, but have yet to see the same effect from strong Digging. Having said that, I've had any number of stories that were picked up and got a great ride from Slashdot, but got almost no traction on Digg.

[tomzx]

well, there's also a bit of gaming with title/description presentation. I had made a post about a tech beach and I guess my title wasn't really appealing and later on I saw MY post (even what I had written) be stolen and reposted on digg with a new title, this time it got more diggs (and if I remember, I also saw something similar going on shoutwire)

[SonicReducer]

If it's interesting, it will get dugg.

There are no "secrets".

Interesting and cool = front page
Lame and boring = wont make front page

And don't bother trying to beg for diggs, it wont happen like that. Even if it does, people will bury the site so fast it's not even going to be worth the effort.

Agreed 100%

[vprp]

Well, as mentioned before, "interesting and cool = front page."

So, it all starts with interesting content. You either have it or you don't and if you don't, the best copywriting in the world won't be able to help you.

With that said, an attractive title can help at times. As an example, when the iTunes Music Store started selling episodes of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, they did so under a subscription model. Pay a certain amount and you can download the next 15 episodes as they air daily.

Well, I thought the story was the fact that it was sort of a "subscription" model so I focused on that in the title. It didn't make the front page, though. There was an identical article that did make it to the front page, though and the title focused on the fact that you could download The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.

I just got an article on the front page today. The title was "Apple Debuts Two NEW iTunes Features! (http://www.ipodbank.com/showthread.php?t=248)" Honestly, I don't think the "features" that debuted were all that interesting and I think the title helped in this case. Who knows? I know I found it interesting enough to post it to Digg so maybe it was actually interesting news.

[vprp]

Or here's another example.

The title used for Digg is: Intel Slip reveals Apple timetable for Powermacs

On the other hand, the title of the actual article is: Forget hot and heavy, Intel's new mantra is lean and mean

http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/48AAEE3A287A6213CC25714F000230BC

If you actually read the article, it isn't really about Intel and Apple. The reader just spotted something in the article (a paragraph) and thought that a certain view would be attractive to Digg readers. So he focused on it and got on the front page.

[admans]

I got lots of article up on the Digg but never on the homepage. But i get avg. of 16 diggs per article which isnt bad IMHO and yes decent amount of traffic as well.

[ly2]

I made it to the front page by just putting a URL as the title lol.
I didnt know any better, and I think it was dumb luck. It's probably something digg users never seen done, perhaps why I made it? It stood out..

[petertdavis]

I made it to the front page by just putting a URL as the title lol.
I didnt know any better, and I think it was dumb luck. It's probably something digg users never seen done, perhaps why I made it? It stood out..
Very interesting. What was the article about?

[jkomp]

I want to get to the index with http://digg.com/gaming/UFO_Invades_Myspace_Profiles
I think my title is catchy but dont seem to be getting anywhere :S

[shabda]

No offence but I think the tittle is too crass for me to read the story.

[jkomp]

stupid; dull; insensitive; materialistic; rude; ill-mannered
That's really how you would describe the title? I thought it was intriguing :(

[Charisse V]

What is Digg? Do they pay you for your articles?

Thanks,

Charisse