Thanks for the update, @anyx! I've been thinking about the whole repost thing too, as I'm awfully conflicted about it.
On the one hand, if you're reposting your own work from an off-platform source, it's not like it's plagiarism - though the fact that the content is out there somewhere else is kind of problematic. If you're revisiting an old blog post and you've updated it and expanded upon it that's one thing, but simply copy-pasting doesn't really take that much effort. At the same time, you invested initial effort in its original creation, so it's a bit murky.
On the other hand, if someone is reposting content that had at one point been posted on Steemit already, it's more of a case of double-dipping than anything else. I understand the impetus to give a poor-performing post a "second chance" by reposting it once more after the 30-day window closes, but it seems disingenuous to me. What are your thoughts?
The issue of double-dipping is an interesting one to me, since it's at least partially a consequence of the 30-day payout limit and (possibly even more so) the 1-day curation rewards cutoff. If curation rewards were paid after a post's initial payout, there would be an explicit incentive for people to go hunting for lost posts.
Reposting an old blog, IMHO, is simply a bad idea - period. In academics, it is considered self-plagiarism if you use the body of your previously written pieces without citation. I've got a bunch of quality posts that didn't make a penny when I first started writing here. Sure, I've been tempted to repost, but never have because it is, as you've mentioned, "double dipping".
I have taken a few of my off-site content and published on Steemit - but I have also clearly stated that it was reposted and the link to the original article.
If you do a Google search, you will see that Steemit articles are being listed. The bots recognize key words, headers, photo ALT text, and backlinks. These things help a writer because Google search will (eventually) recognize you as an authority on the subject and bump you higher in the search engine.
That being said, to simply copy and paste, even if it's off-platform can have a detrimental effect.
My suggestion is to write a new post and backlink to the archived ones using appropriate tags.
And @anyx, speaking of tags - maybe if the people running contests and series posts used a specific tag - something that the general public wouldn't have a reason to use regularly... like "sequence", cheetah could then ignore that post. I would recommend spot checking to make sure it's on the up and up, but certainly not every single time. :)
"Self Plagiarism" is an interesting idea.. and one that is going to have a different answer on whether or not it is acceptable or kosher, depending on whom you talk to.
I see a lot of bloggers and authors just copy pasting their posts from YEARS ago, and acting like they deserve a reward. I also see people reposting their steemit posts, and when I ask why, they say (and I quote) "they made next to no money the first time, being that almost nobody saw them."
It's a tragic situation where people get greedy, and have the mentality that they deserve a reward. I wish we could transition towards original content, but it just seems like people are now running out of ideas but still want to be rewarded.
I don't know what to do, to be honest.
I'll be honest - I've had plenty of posts that have earned nothing. That doesn't seem like it justifies trying again with duplicate content. Your content had its chance to rise and/or fall on its own merits; using excuses like "I didn't have as many followers then" or "there are a lot more users now" or something similar seems like petty rationalization to me.
It does seem motivated by greed, and that's a shame. Yes, let's be honest here, part of the allure of Steemit is the opportunity to earn rewards for your content, but making that your primary motivator for posting here sends the wrong message.
Oh, and you're a sybil, so
!cheetah ban