Sphinn.com is dropping its voting (ala Digg) system for a new editor controlled model. Sounds like there has been lower engagement than in past years, likely leaving a larger percentage of the activity to spammers and voting mobs. It will be interesting to see if the full-on editor model will be better than the group voting model. I wouldn’t think it would be, but then again…
> Others complain that someone else seems to “win” all the time.
Although I don’t think I ever typed those words on the web, I have to agree. It’s why I bailed a year ago. I loved the idea that marketers would decide what is the most valuable content in our industry, but after seeing what constantly got voted up (opposed to routinely greater stuff that didn’t get any votes – yes, I was one of the people who went deeper into the site), I just stopped believing that it had the same value for me that I originally thought it had.
Note… I said, “for me.” This is totally my opinion. But in the end, it just felt like anything a Sphinn rock star would submit would sky rocket. Even if there were dupe submissions. I’m all for the authority of a rock star Sphinner, but there’s no way the dupe submissions weren’t getting any traction if they were equally as good. It just meant too many readers stuck to a tiny slipstream of submissions and embrace the whole site.
Readers will still be able to submit articles. But editors (who actually always had the ability to control things anyway despite the votes – hey, sounds like American Idol!) will play a bigger role. Sounds a lot like YouMoz, come to think of it.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m very sad the “people” thing didn’t work. I haven’t given up on social communities though… just maybe that one. But I’m definitely interested in giving Sphinn another look when its “under new management” so to speak.