In both copies of the script, show_infobar was set to true. Not having this working is not a big deal to me so don't worry about this bug since it sounds like it is just me and my set up.

I don't hammer Digg too hard. There are a few things I have done to prevent this. The 'bury_interval' in one copy of the script is set to 22 and is set to 7 in the other. Also, I have customized the default view of Digg to a few categories so that I am not blindly doing a bury across all of Digg. Lastly, I remain positively active so that my account isn't seen as just doing buries.

To answer your last part - calculate how long do you need to stay on a page so all the bury requests can take place - Maybe a second. Two seconds max. There usually isn't much to bury on the pages i am viewing unless I do a deliberate search.

Thanks much. Keep up the good work.

There is another variable on line 27 of the script:

show_infobar : true ,

if that's set to false, you won't see the info bar. Maybe you changed that somehow. Other than that, unfortunately I can't reproduce this bug to tell you where the problem is.

Now i just need to make sure I don't get banned for using scripts.

@pwlin

Correct, I do not get the "info bar" at all. This is not an issue outside of testing this out. Thanks for the info on how to check this with Firebug. Because of that tip, I can see that this is working correctly with the script installed twice. I can see that the 14 code for the script that buries things as inaccurate. I can also see the 16 code for things that are a general bury.

Thanks Much Again. Now i just need to make sure I don't get banned for using scripts.

@Pasta2000

I just don't get the report of what it 

had done or is doing (never did show)

To check if this is burying DIGGs correctly, 

is there an easy way to tell after something is 

buried how it was buried? 

So far it looks to be working as expected. Things I want buried get buried. I just don't get the report of what it had done or is doing (never did show). I suspect that is because of how I have my FF3 set up. I also installed the script a second time under a new name. One copy of the script is for users that I do a "bury". the other copy is for keywords (or in my case submitted web sites) that bury as "inaccurate". I did learn in doing this not to leave variable list empty ( //ig; ) because it reads it as a comment and the script doesn't work then. I just put in something so odd that it should find nothing to bury.

To check if this is burying DIGGs correctly, is there an easy way to tell after something is buried how it was buried?

Thanks for the updating this so quickly.

@Pasta2000

I added a 'bury_type' variable at the beginning of the script.

use the following numbers to indicate the type of your buries:

for general bury, use 1

for duplicate story, use 2

for spam, use 3

for wrong topic, use 4

for inaccurate, use 5

for OK, this is lame, use 6

This is a global variable though, meaning it works for ALL the users/keywords.

Right now implementing it on a per user/keyword basis will destroy the simplicity and robustness of the script so i hope you still enjoy this added feature.

Please let me know if there are any bugs.

What would it take to change the script to "Bury as Inaccurate"? I ask because some if the places that are DUGG are complete BS. A plain Bury isn't good enough. - May I suggest updating the script so that one can choose how something can get buried. Thanks

this is a fallacy (greasemonkey uses javascript) :P

@smaulz:

i don't use this script daily but just tested it again on a fresh ff3 profile and it works. You should see an info bar at the bottom of every page like this screenshot: http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii202/pwlin/...

The user names should be added as a regular expression like: /user1|user2|user3/ig

Also Digg is sometimes slow so you may need to change 'var bury_interval' to something higher. 15 would be ok.

ATTENTION: Anyone who hates spammers on Digg, please visit the following page that I have set up to fight spammers, 'smear artists', and the rest of the scum on Digg. Help our community out by leaving a comment with any user(s) you think should be added to this list!

http://jeremybuff.wordpress.com/smear-artists/

This working for anyone? Just found it and installed, edited the blacklist, and don't see any results. Has Digg done another redesign or something that I missed?

Excellent! Now it works well with greasekit and Safari on all the Digg pages.

Bhima: Thanks for reporting the problem, I have fixed most of the issues with Digg's new design. Please let me know if there are still bugs.

yellowriver: I'm sorry but this script doesn't autobury comments. It only works with posts. I've been busy a while back writing the parts for autoburying comments but then Digg changed the design and I had to rewrite a lot of stuff and there were some real projects waiting for me so I never finished that part. I'll be back on it as soon as there is some free time.

Well... the new Digg changes interfere with the autobury script. Some pages work and some don't. Pity that.

-----

How can this be modified to auto bury comments by user or is there a version availble?

Thanks..

I don't use a lot of greasekit scripts but I use this one everyday.

One more observation: keywords which are made up of multiple words do not work in the way I expect or understand. Some get buried some don't.

Anyway, thanks for the update.

Bhima, it's great that this script still works! I just fixed a small issue. Sorry for not updating in a long time because I've been busy with other things but I have your requests in my mind and will add them gradually.

Well, it's been a while since I've started using this script. And I have the following comments:

This script works on Safari also (via greasekit).

I wish it was easier to add keywords or Usernames (the pipe isn't on my keyboard).

I wish it was possible to easily check if a user has been disappeared... many of the users I add went away, presumably for violating Diggs rules.

I really, really wish there was a comment autobury script (digg comment enhancer script is also nice)

How very odd. I could have sworn I tried to use domains as keywords before and it did not work but now it does. Great!

This last version works very well indeed. There are a few things still lacking... but I suppose we'll wait for Autobury Comments sorts of features... which I think are more important . Using this for a few days has made it clear to me that what I am doing is making up for imperfections in the DIgg ranking algorithm. But I suppose the things I envision are computationally expensive for the Digg servers.

@Good To Too, I don't think running a Greasemonkey script on the same page you are visiting breaks any of Digg's terms of service. I mean, it's not like this is a 'crawler' or 'spider' or anything like that.

As for the useragent, check out the script source, it's not tampering the UA at all.

Please consider adding

- a delay to the bury action

-- between a user specified range M..N

- user selectable bury type

-- again or mix it up

The idea here is to reduce the likelihood of detection as a script. also be sure not to self identify as greasemonkey via useragents

+1 on HatastiX' down-mod by username

- but please include a delay function AND non-linear option

-- no pattern of top to bottom of page down-modding

@pwlin

No, I was just thinking of text files as an easier option to reload my users_blacklist and keywords_blacklist after updating the script. It's no big thing.

Great about URLs as keywords, now I have some work to do!

:)

@Bhima, thanks for your observations! You can already bury stories based on their domain. For example if you want to bury all stories from stormfront.com, just put stormfront.com in your keywords_blacklist. It will bury all the stories from that domain. I am also working on an 'autobury comments' solution and hopefully I can add it to this script if possible.

@Bjalf, Unfortunately Greasemonkey can not read local text files, only Firefox extensions can do that. However, if you have your text file hosted on your own webserver, (say, http://localhost/autobury_prefs.txt), I can add an option to this script so it fetches the text file first. Is this what you want? Please Let me know, I can add this option easily.

Also as I replied to Bhima, you can already bury URLs, add them to your keywords_blacklist.

This script is an excellent idea! I have 2 suggestions:

- read 'var users_blacklist' and 'var keywords_blacklist' from a text file.

- autobury based on URL.

So, this is an interesting development. The script works for me as advertised, it's a bit slower but more satisfying to use. Over the weekend I got a little gung-ho and had to scale back a bit... it is clear I must become more skillful at defining keywords. However with a reasonable sized list I am able to read the 'newest' section of Digg without thinking I am simply wading through duplicates, spam, and hate. I really feel like it's easier to spend time promoting interested submissions.

Another thing that had occurred to me is that when I thought I wanted to autobury user XYZ it was because they frequently posted either spam or links to racist websites (like stormfront). So that makes me think that having a domain blacklist is just as, or even more, useful as having a keyword blacklist.

Also it seams to me that many of the user names I windup adding to my blacklist are short term things... they must be because many create unknown user errors when I clean up my Digg block list.

My final observation is that some parts of blacklists are very temporary. There are lots of pathetic spammers who have copied a brief snippet of yesterday's news along with a link to the source in some bizarre attempt to get diggs. So the day *after* some interesting news breaks, there is the pathetic backwash which lasts for 48 hours and then goes away...

I don't think all of these things should be considered feature requests... just observations. The script as it is makes my digging more pleasant.... Oh, and I'd far rather auto-burry the comments of the people I've blocked, than to just hide them (as the current system does)