Ah, so you're suggesting because of the curation rewards (discovering new content), the status quo will perpetuate.
Archival content doesn't give value back. It's a one way exchange to author if upvoted.
But comments can still be paid out, right?. So perhaps there would be more value in commenting on archival posts then in the curation angle on new content...
I have come across a user that is reposting the same content (without any indication of which, that I noticed) two days after the initial posting. I think this frequency is far too rapid to repost, however, after a set long-term period, could a potential system of nomination for an explorer that could hold the nominated content be feasible? There is potential for the community to again curate and further discussions/form updated chains to allow for indicated edits and maybe form collaborations between related nominated items. And the authors would have as many opportunities to be rewarded for the information as the community sees fit.
I noted this same user cross posting only a day apart under different tags, which as you can imagine, is leading to a significant amount of profits per piece of content. A platform like reddit will generally respond with downvotes to someone who abuses this, but is agreeable to it as long as the amount of locations shared is not exploited and the poster acknowledges that the content can be found elsewhere. Does cross posting by utilizing one or two tags repeatedly seem abusive or are the people using the 5 most applicable tags for one post just "fools" not fully profiting on content?
From the small inconvenience I experienced in that the video I was watching was not the continuation of the series that I had intended to view, but something I had already invested time in watching, I think that these behaviors on a large scale, for the sake of extending the amount of time content can be rewarded, would make finding novel content, even just within a single blog, more difficult.