Recently, Digg has really started cracking down on duplicate submissions and have actively gone after those who do it abusively by intentionally resubmitting something that they know has already been submitted. This is good.
There are times when a submission is good enough to be featured on the front page but wasn’t submitted by a user with the social capital to get it the attention it deserves. Case in point:
There is no question that the Digg community took a liking to the video. There is no question that the video had been submitted at least 3 times before (probably more than that). The way that Digg is set now, technically speaking, this is a dupe and should (A) not have been submitted, (B) the submitters after the first person should have simply Dugg the original submission, and (C) the other submissions should not have made the front page.
Thank goodness that the dupe system isn’t perfect or Susan Boyle’s amazing performance would not have had over 6K diggs with tens of thousands of users enjoying the video. Still, the underlying negatives associated with duping stories outweigh the benefits of having strong content hit the front page. Is there a solution that can discourage dupes, give credit to the original submitter, and focus on content as much as possible?