I have talked about Digg before, and I am very impressed with the technology behind the site. I've also said before that I don't use Digg very much because I don't like the "news by contest" format. In other words, I don't really want the content presented to me to be based on votes received by a bunch of people whose interests may or may not be compatible with mine.

Part of the problem is the potential for people to vote stories to the top of the list based on factors other than merit. I have no reason to believe that ballot stuffing is a problem at Digg. But logic and human nature has always told me that it could be.

Today brings a post at Forever Geek that may have uncovered some irregularities in the voting process. The story was fairly even-handed and while I don't reach any firm conclusions from the data presented, I do find it troubling that Forever Geek was apparently banned from Digg as a result of the post.

I missed it at the time, but David Johnston at Real Tech News posted about a similar issue back in December.

I don't know if people are monkeying around with the Digg process or not, but banning someone for posting objective data and raising the question is not good PR.

It's bad PR and it makes you look guilty, whether you are or not.