Check out Digg. It’s like the “Survivor” of group blog communities. Members “digg” stories (a.k.a. add them to the feed) and they ascend to popularity based on how many others find it interesting enough to “digg,” themselves. All the diggs - votes, basically - are listed for everyone to see. Transparency here is both appealing and distasteful. Like “Survivor,” one wants, of course, to be the most voted, but once you survey the contents of what actually is chosen, you have to question your voters’ judgement.

It’s a cool idea, and I think that it could potentially cause a storm of outrage and devotion - but the content is almost completely useless. Do we need a distilled replication of the general state of the internet? We delight in new templates for portals of information, sure, but I don’t think it’s enough to merely have an innovative system. It won’t keep me coming back.