Yet, even with over 729 diggs (as of 3:54 p.m. PT on 10/27/08) it did not reach the front page. Want to know why?
Take a look at this question sent to Digg management and the reply:
Thread Reply to this thread +14 diggs +14 / -0 reaper527
5 hr 46 min ago Dugg by friends: gmarie624
i sent an email through the bug report.
here is the email i sent[quote]
this story here should have made it to the front page as it recieved 477 diggs within 13 hours of it being posted
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Obama_Bombshell_ ...
people accuse the site of being partisan, and this doesn't help. is there any technical explanation of how this story is failing to make the front page, or even the "hot in this section"?
[/quote]
and here is the response i got[quote]
Thanks for taking the time to contact us at Digg.com.
The Digg.com community has collectively voted to bury the story to which you refer. Though the story has been buried, it is still available on Digg.com.
If you or a friend Dugg, submitted or commented on the story, there will be a link on your respective profiles. If you did not have the chance to Digg the story, you can search for it at http://digg.com/search - just be sure to select “Include Buried Stories” when you search.
Please don’t hesitate to contact us should you have any further questions.
Thanks,
--Digg Support
[/quote]
so it appears that even with 546 diggs, the obama bury brigade has killed this story, and it won't even show up on a search.
Yep...once again, Digg's BIAS IS SHOWING!
These two commenters called it accurately:
+4 diggs +4 / -0 webXL
3 hr 48 min ago "The Digg.com community has collectively voted to bury the story to which you refer."
No,
"Digg.com in cooperation with the Huffington Post has collectively voted to suppress any stories that threaten the election of The Obamessiah"
Socialism > Democracy > Freedom of Speech
Thread +2 digg +2 / -0 Striker101
35 minutes agothe key word from Digg is "collectively"!