It’s an exercise in futility. A competent programmer could easily throw together a page scraper to determine the top submitters, so when the dust settles, Digg will still have problems with pay-for-play, but the most prolific users will no longer be recognized by Digg for their work that makes the site so successful.
To prove my point, I've done exactly that: I've put together a script that displays the top 100 users at Digg, with the list being updated twice per day. You can see the list here.
Update: I do work for Netscape, but this has nothing to do with them. I did this on my own time and of my own volition.
Also, I didn't create this list for any mean-spirited reasons; I enjoy Digg and the service it provides, but I think Kevin made the wrong choice in removing the top users list. I'm not trying to profit off of this, and I'm not trying to scalp members from Digg for Netscape. I'm just proving a point - this data is easily attainable by anyone who is motivated to get it. Removing the top users list from digg.com does little in stopping people from finding out who the top Diggers are.