Digg.com - Use Them to Get Visitors to Your Site.

24 comments

Up until today when I thought of digg.com and getting visitors there, my reaction was *yawn*, I'll never made the front page. Boy was I wrong. I submitted my first news article to the site today, about the massive Google SPAM bust.

When it comes to traffic, I've never seen anything like this. The article made the front page and I am now getting about 100-200 unique visitors a MINUTE!!!! With in the first two hours I got over 7,000 unique, er no, make that 7,600, er no, 9,058...you get the idea!!!!

You can see the stats right here and logs. The stats are from one page, just the article submited to Digg.

If you got some good stories, you should really try submitting them to digg.com!!!!

100% success rate at making the front page is not bad at all!!!!

It is suggested that you be on a server that can handle a good DOS attack of visitors!! I first found out it made it to the index page by seeing the site was down, so I looked at digg.com and...oh my...I better restart apache and get the site back up, I'm on the front page!!! I've had SSH top open since then to watch it just in case it goes down again.

If you can, make the page as static as possible. I'm on 100% HTML with just one SSI code, to show the comments. We've seen horror stories where getting to the front page crashed the server, and we know what Shawn at DigitalPoint did after Digg crashed the server a few times!!! Getting a DOS attack of visitors can be good, if you can handle it.

Comments

Just Hope They Don't Slashdot It As Well...

You can see why so many people out there are gaming Digg, but a lot of Diggees complain the traffic doesn't convert very well - any notes on that side of it?

Traffic conversion...

...is very poor - the reader comes to the site simply to get more background on what they read on Digg/Slashdot.

The source website is, if anything a bit of a nuisance as it takes you away from the Digg site.

I have been slashdotted and dugg in my time, and yes - a wall of traffic hit the server (fortunately, we have a database lite mode for these situations) and hardly any improvement on newsletter sign-ups etc was reported.

However, thanks to the front paging on those sites, loads of blogs also discussed the article we wrote, and that created a lot of inbound linkage.

At one time, we actually beat a major brandname for their own name in google searches thanks to the huge number of blog links we got in a very short period of time.

Just after one particuarly notorious Digg/Slashdot event, our PageRank on Google jumped noticably a few weeks later. Without any proactive link-building effort on our part.

Accepting that PR is not the god it once was, it is a nice vague indicator of sorts.

DIGG V Slashdot

Slashdot are geeks they would notice if you Cookie stuffed them ... where as Digg .. well they can take the a mugging without out even noticing it happened..

DaveN

How much money did you make?

As long as you banked some extra cash, that's the main thing. Congrats.

Blarg!!!!!

From 35,000 impressions...I got a measly $1.15 (Yahoo) and for 3,064 with Google...$1.35. *Changes back to Google.*

cellularnews was right, BIG time!!!!

I'm guessing you might be able to get better conversions for geting visitors to join a mailing list since it's not an ad.

I think

it all depends on what site you have whether digg is worth it or not. People there like to waste time ...

It's similar to MySpace traffic. If you have a site with info about Brittany or Paris, it might be the right kind of traffic for you.

Mike

Reread DaveN's post

n/m

Digg this

I also yawn and ignore digg but at the same time am upset that they are showing up high in Google's serps, I can not think of a junkier place than Digg.

...and just because a group of digg morons says something is cool doesn't make it so.

Wow, that sucks!

Man, $2.40 for that many people? No wonder Digg is opening the place up to other segments. The techies just don't click enough!

Funny.

I'd like to see your standard contract for stuffing-for-a-fee, DaveN. I can't find a lawyer capable of writing one. I really didn't want to own the entire scam, but alas, I guess that's the seo dilemma.

Still Nothing Compared to Slashdot

I had one story featured on Digg, but have also had stories featured on Slashdot - let me tell you, nothing beats Slashdot. You talk about 100 - 200 concurrent visitors? Try 1500 - 2000 concurrent visitors from Slashdot (no joke). Over 2 days I got over 200,000 uniques, not to mention the ancilliary visitors from others picking up the story.

Digg is nice, but I'll take slashdot any day.

For the record, even though the traffic doesn't covert as well, a bump of traffic like that inevitably leads to at least more ad revenue.

Digg vs Slashdot

When LinuxP2P.com is Slashdotted, something on the order of 10% of the visitors clicked on a link there to xMule.ws (a UNIX-based p2p prog); very very few clicked on ads; the percentage was far lower than the typical 0.01%. I was told that this is primarily because virtually every one in the Slashdot demographic has the AdBlock extension for Firefox, which I consider particularly evil. YPN is the only way I can live with spending so much money on a dedicated server, which I use for business and a lot of other things. It basically pays for itself.

With Digg, the traffic is much lower and hardly no one from Digg clicked on the xMule.ws link, however YPN revenue was several magnitudes higher than normal.

I have repeated this experiment five times in the last 3 months; 1 Slashdot 0 Digg, 1 S + 1 D, 1 S + 1 D, 1 D. It's much harder to get on Slashdot too.

Bizarre logs

Nintendo, your log file is almost 100% Firefox users.

It completely skews the 10% FireFox adoption that the indutry claims.

Does that mean everyone at Digg only uses Firefox?

There goes the

There goes the Digg=no-techies and Slashdot=techies myth.

Ninno, nice article man..

'splain please

These people are getting tarred as spammers - and getting hated over the term - because they used an algo loophole. No mention made of forum spamming, or real spam techniques. They'd be properly called blackhatters, not spammers. You can spam email, you can spam forums, you can spam referrer logs, and it's all push stuff. But you can't really 'spam' the serps, because Google's making the choices and it's a pull process on their part, not a push by the site owners. Putting up a website isn't spamming.

So,'splain how people who aren't actually pushing anything are branded as spammers? What about those that do push? Forum spammers dumping links on my forum? Sure. People who post crap with links to by blog? Sure. People who push inflammatory articles to Digg when the intent is to market their website? Oh, hey, wait just a dang second!

(no affront to the OP intended, I think both are valid and neither are spammers - and both did an excellent job IMO).

I don't think the myth was

I don't think the myth was techies vs non-techies. I think the perception was more based on smart techies vs other techies.

smart techies vs other

smart techies vs other techies.

Smart techies are even more ad blind than usual techies.

Ding! Idea!

What if I posted my 'spam theory' to digg, pointed at the digg article, then over here showing that the intent of the article was to get traffic? How would I work in a link to my site? I need a life insurance angle here :).

digg vs. slashdot

On revenews we had a great conversation about digg vs. slashdot a while back. http://www.revenews.com/chrisboyd/2006/01/digg_vs_slashdot.html

Good analysis in that piece, and the comments, as well as here. Just thought this would be relevant.

Aaron, glad to see you've gotten in on the digg bug! Congrats, but be careful, one of our bloggers got crazy and started submitting his stories over and over, and we got banned and can't get back in, oh well.

Cant Discount the link

"9 people have posted this story on their own blogs."

As of right now, 9 people have already sydicated your article. Thats only the ones that use Diggs interface.

Free Links Rock!!

Oh my! I only got 'Internet

Oh my! I only got 'Internet Explorer' in the logs twice!!! I sure hope

$ENV{'REMOTE_ADDR'} - $ENV{'HTTP_USER_AGENT'} - $ENV{'REQUEST_URI'} - $ENV{'HTTP_REFERER'}

is correct!!!! That's what generated the logs, plus the code for the time.

You don't earn money but backlink

I believe those are tech ppl so they are not going to click any Ads, hence you won't make much from them. However, if you story is something special, you will get tons of backlink.

this guy also have made digg front page. He didn't earn much money, but got 2000+ backlink in a few week

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=86690

Digg.com does send good traffic ...

If you don't make much from 200 hits a minute, then take it as a heads up, that your site is not monetized very well.

A fairly recent article I wrote about Coca-Cola Blak made front page on digg within 10 minutes, and over the next 2 days, I made more than $200 with adsense, and another $60+ with Chitika.

Now not everything you Digg will have the same results - your mileage may vary - dependant on topic popularity etc, but the ones that do take off, can send you a sh!tload of traffic in a short period of time.

If your sites are well optimized, you should be able to convert almost ANY traffic with a fairly consistant CTR.

And yes, as mentioned already, the amount of links you can get makes it worth your while too!

Let's say you got 20.000

Let's say you got 20.000 uniques .. Let's say a .5 average click revenue ..

That's a 2% CTR... Not bad .. But not so good either..

Did you had more than 20.000 ?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.