Haha great brain exercise and because this is a though provoking post i will give a counterargument instead, yes what you describe as double posting a content really sounds an awful lot like double expending, but there is a big difference that i want you to consider, in bitcoin double spending is prevented when the nodes come to one consensus and pick which one is the real transaction and which one is the fake, Steem has the same mechanism to prevent such double expending.
But a post or as we call it a proof of brain, have two cases, the first one would be that, when it was published for the first time it did not reached its full potential, meaning a certain group of people saw it but not all of the people on Steemit, obliviously the second time it gets published it would be another group of people that approved and give it value to the post or proof of brain that it did not had before.
The second case would be, when people that saw the post in the first time it was posted feel that they did not rewarded the author enough for it the first time around, be it because the user was low on voting power, or low SP, and now they want to to give the author something more for his work.
As the extreme cases of abuse of users happen, that gray area of the "permissible" gets smaller and smaller, should we punish everyone that puts the same set of seven words together? o the one that post five times the same content in a week. Like always everything is about lines people draw in the sand .
Great post anyx, i think the more people know and think how they should approach double posting the better, of course, so we can reach a general consensus and draw lines in the sand, this kind of problem can be resolve by talking about them, and this post got me talking and overall thinking about it.
It's a good counter argument. This kind of touches on something I'd like to see on steemit: the ability to have longer term rewards. A few ways I could see this happen; for example, imagine you could refresh a post in such a way that only new people who didn't vote on the last one could vote on the new one. In a way, that means only the new audience could give you a reward. There's various reasons why this can't work in the steem system, but I digress... it would be interesting.
Allowing votes to be counted for reward no matter the time it was posted would be the logic thing to do, after all your work is still being used, shouldn't you be reward for it? Lets face it, without enough "screening" time, be a new user that have never seen the post, or people that did not got the chance in the seven day grace period, the author will have to make the same post each week over and over again, to get something of the work he has already done before, this is a bad way of building thing if you have to do it all over again each week (There is also the followers earned for the post, but this leaving this to chance and it will not work out in the long run)
How much time is enough? If one people having all the money is the problem, then, lets go the socialist route, after a seven day period, each vote submitted to a post, will go to everyone, that is to say, each post will be Steemit-humanity legacy for everyone. That would make, that the more post there are, the better, so we can start building something, everyone will be reward for it (and if you want to, you can add a few conditions, so everyone is not a freeloader, you are free to so), in the long run humans will benefit from the work of past humans (like we always do). (this is just an idea, and everyone is free to give their own ideas, i am just using in how the patented work is used, option b, everyone can used it to their benefit, but this don't resolve the issue what the author would have do next week)
Merry Christmas everyone.