Today I was Powncing on the merits of Diggs democratic system.
It seems at times there is a blatant effort to bury stories systematically. 
I have been tracking a story about "Firefox Cookies" by Adam L that was buried
after 106 diggs. It was a picture of "Firefox Cookies", and attracted an amazing number of diggs in just 3 hours.  A handful of people buried the story, but none buried it after 78
diggs. So how did the story magically get buried at the 106 mark?

After a while of monitoring my community replies it seems as if this not an isolated event. It seems that many submitters are having these exact problems.
I see people submit stories to Digg, but the
duplicates (submitted by the popular users) get to the front page. Is Digg systematically preventing stories from making the front page?

For me if Digg wants to be truly democratic, remove the friends feature otherwise it is just another news site like Slashdot.  Democracy was what differentiated them.  In the real world, we vote or Digg a good idea or person who has a good idea.  So is it rigged?  Or are we just a bunch of followers who Digg what other people Digg?

Have you been victim of a bury while your story was in the upcoming
list?  Tell me your stories. and submit your list of Digg alternatives.

ON: Digg.  Is It Really Democratic? via @jpenabickley