Mixx, a Digg-like site that ranks news stories based on reader voting, will launch a new “breaking news” feature later today that should get real news onto the home page very, very fast. More on that below.
Since launching just last September, Mixx has been on a tear to release new products. Groups came in December, followed by private mail in Februrary. Also in February they released a clustering feature that I think would fix a big problem at Digg – duplicate stories describing the same event. With the new feature, other users could add different but related stories to the main news item. This removes the need for Duelling stories and it gives the reader more content on the stuff they just clicked on.
So today they’re releasing yet another new feature. Like the others, it’s worth a little thought. The goal is to get the really hot news up to the home page very quickly and without having to go through the normal vote gathering process, which can take up to 24 hours before a story makes it to the home page. To get this special treatment, A special user, called a Super Mixxer (here’s how you become a Super Mixxer), must tag a story as Breaking. Once a story has been tagged by two Super Mixxers, the story goes to the home page under the Breaking News area. The story will continue to build up votes and move into the general Popular area of the page at that time. Others may drop off entirely.
For now only text stories can be Breaking, although they will add more story types over time.
This is different from how Digg handles things. Nothing gets special treatment until its gone through the normal voting procedure. Once it’s a top page story, though, if it continues to do well it can move over to the Top story in whatever topic is being viewed. So Mixx is getting the best news to the home page very, very quickly. Whereas Digg likes to make it tough to get on the home page at all, but then find ways for the really good stuff to stay there even longer.
I think the Mixx feature is a great way to make sure that breaking news gets to the home page extremely fast, possibly hours before it goes popular on Digg The key pressure points are whether the Super Mixxers are in fact all that Super. And if they are willing to take the time to constantly scan incoming news for relevant stuff. Another thing to think about – if this model works and traffic grows substantially at the site, look out for the guys that will want to pay the Super Mixxers to vote for their stuff.
It is just one more feature that I like and that Digg doesn’t have or show much inclination to build. At some point Mixx is going to have their very onw big audience for social voted news, second only to Digg in reach.
cool service, however the Mixx logo needs some major facelifting
These guys are a great example of ‘releasing early, releasing often!’ Clustering was huge (and much needed), and getting breaking news to the top faster is also a big win. However, I’m sceptical as to the execution of this – as you point about, what makes a super mixxer so super? I fear this may lead to wisdom of the few rather than wisdom of the crowds. One of key criterion for wise crowds is a diverse, independent population. At the very least, the diversity of breaking news will be limited to the news that these super mixxers believe to be important.
With that said, kudos to them for giving this a go. One of the problems with social news sites is the delay in breaking news (vs blogs for example), and they are attacking this pain point at its core. Good luck!
Now i know about mixx, all this time i only know digg. Thanks for the information.
The website’s down currently.
Hey..Michael…Was this your way of showing us how great you looked in your childhood!!!
“digg-like site”… nice likeable term
To me this looks like a very good feature. Its always good to see the breaking news at a glance and not wait for them to bubble to the top.
I like the idea but I think digg already has problems with groups banding together to put stories on to the front page, even charging for this service. To me this Supermixxer could create such a problem on MIXX in that some users could influence stories more than others by a huge margin.
I do think its a great idea though and with moderation and oversight for abuse i think it will work in their favour.
I think they should allow people to add other sources for stories, and then vote them whether its a good source or bad, and whether it corroborate or contests the story.
Sam – good point about the sources. We’re doing a lot of that with NewsCred (currently in Private Alpha, but opening up soon). We’re looking to focus on the the qualitative aspects of news, rather than just popularity. I think that is what you were driving at in your comment.
This isn’t always a good thing.
they started as a another digg but new feature releases may take them ahead digg. Watch out Kevin:)
For those who are “worried” about wisdom of few or the SuperMixxers you should listen to the Social Blend podcast at the Mixxingbowl where Chris McGill explains potential abuses and what will be done.
The Mixx team is really on top of things and they’re also not afraid to admit things aren’t perfect too.
http://mixxingb...g-news-feature/
I like Mixx…a lot.
But I scratched my head at this one. Sounds good in theory but I have to see it in action to really get behind it.
Kudos for them for pushing new stuff out there!!!
I have found that reddit.com gets the news faster than DIGG.com.
It’s fascinating to watch the contortions “digg-like” sites go through trying to avoid editors.
I predict that within 6 months we’ll be hearing about SuperSuperMixers. I’ll be reading the nyt. Because I find they get the news fastest of all.
Well, maybe I can give some perspective here. Being as I’m a “Super Mixxer” and all that jazz.
Mixx is so unlike other social news sites that I can’t believe it. Not because of their features (though the features are great), but because of the folks behind Mixx.
They participate on the user-created forum. They appear on the fan podcast. They answer emails and feedback, and get this: They actually listen to what we say and incorporate it into the site!
There is hardly a week that goes by without them tweaking their site based on user feedback. Not all are worthy of a post or considered a new feature. Some are as small as changing the way mixx mail works or making it easier to only get the email notifications you want.
But I realize that does nothing to allay people’s fears about the “Super Mixxers” mucking everything up. I know people are worried about voting rings and coalitions to front page their stories. I know people wonder if the people wearing the “Super Mixxer” badge really deserve it. I think I can address those issues.
The staff at Mixx doesn’t just base their SM designation on folks with high “karma” or popularity. It’s not even slanted towards people who submit more than others. It’s a combination of many factors. Most importantly, the mixx staff review the comments, feedback and output of the people they want to give the SM status to. They consider the person’s overall value. Meaning, they don’t award it based on certain parts of a user’s history; they consider the user’s contribution as a whole. Or so it has been explained to me.
Look at me, for example. I’m not a top submitter. I have a decent amount of karma, but am in no way near the top. I don’t care if my stories hit the front page at all. I joined mixx to find interesting articles, find some interesting people and share stories I thought people would enjoy. People could offer me a lot of money to use my limited powers for voting rings or such, but it would be a waste of effort on their part.
I can’t speak for all Super Mixxers, just myself, but I can say this: Every person I’ve seen with a SM badge has proven themselves to be decent, thoughtful user. Users who participate on the user forum, submit feedback to the staff and share their responses with the community, leave thoughtful comments on articles they like and consistently submit great stuff. I’ve interacted with them enough to feel confident that they would also not abuse this SM status.
Will is always be that way? I can’t say. No one can predict such things. But the staff at mixx has yet to disappoint me, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. If I were a betting man, I wouldn’t bet against them.
Nice. Look at digg. I haven’t noticed anything over there that has changed in the last few months. I remember seeing a commenting system revamp video shown by Kevin, but they STILL haven’t implemented it. They are stale bored and hoping someone will buy them. Or maybe they see digg as a nice little paycheck each month, but unfortunately they took a fair amount of funding so they HAVE to sell the site to someone.
Does anyone else think mixx is getting some good momentum at the moment?
I think its only a matter of time before the original early adopters jump ship if they have not already gone.
Alright already, I went and joined the damn site! After seeing 23 techcrunch posts I figured I must be behind the times by not joining up …
all I have to say is so? I mean this “idea” is so obvious. But then again it took digg like 3 years to come out with digging pictures.
Why does Mixx get so much coverage on TechCrunch? There have been 1000s of Digg clones with no mention here, yet Mixx gets covered for every minor feature release. Do they share the same VC as TechCrunch?
I believe there is a market saturation for social news websites, publishing news easier or faster on the front page could however convince some digg.com posters to switch.
@20, because Techcrunch is severely biased to any start up that gets funding. They figure that if a VC is willing to put money into a start up then they did their research and know that its good, so I guess I better cover it because I don’t want to look stupid if the thing takes off.
Now what’s Yahoo!’s Buzz gonna do to stay in the Mixx? Can’t wait for them to roll out some community features soon…
Well i love mixx more than Digg. I am in my way to create a socialmedia and networking website for the Arab world.
But i have a Question for TechCrunch?
we ve seen u publish many stories about many startups across the world and specially Israeli once. Why u never published any story from startups originating from the Arab World? Or established internet companies in the Arab world?
Do you know that Yahoo is in talks with a Major Arabic portal to enter that market.
You might as well know that Arab internet users are around 30 million users, that is not a market to ignore.
I new many web 2.0 Arab companies who sent you press releases and u never talked about any!?
WHY TECHCRUNCH?
Is it you hate Arabs?
Well i love mixx more than Digg. I am in my way to create a socialmedia and networking website for the Arab world.
But i have a Question for TechCrunch?
we ve seen u publish many stories about many startups across the world and specially Israeli once. Why u never published any story from startups originating from the Arab World? Or established internet companies in the Arab world?
Do you know that Yahoo is in talks with a Major Arabic portal to enter that market.
You might as well know that Arab internet users are around 30 million users, that is not a market to ignore.
I new many web 2.0 Arab companies who sent you press releases and u never talked about any!?
WHY TECHCRUNCH?
i have feeling that u r not racist? r u?
i am ready to write you a story to you that profile major web 2.0 companies in the Arab world
@Ghaith because when you send a press release you aren’t supposed to sprinkle it with anthrax
Andrew i did not send techcrunch any press release, i know other web 2.0 companies in the Arab world who did. My question is why there is zero coverage on techcrunch about Arab nternet companies?
Sorry for the multi comment posting before, i had an error and wanted to correct it and i tried to stop the page but it was submitted. also sorry for earlier typos.
Andrew can you explain how a press release is sprinkled with anthrax?
and do you work with techcrunch?
This is really good but most of I saw that digg gives result fast than mixx. But you have good post to know about it.
Thanks for sharing.