I think the best solution(s) depends on what we think is important for readers, as this problem isn't really that important for authors, as being made aware of duplicate content wont stop those that don't care, and you might already be aware of older posts as a reader.
The reason I say any solution should focus on the read is because there are always going to be more readers the authors, and expanding the platform relies more on getting more readers, with a few turning to authors than too many authors and only a few readers, as then things turn into a "shouting match".
I see the current feed as being focused on the new, at the cost of the old. Where newer articles are promoted over finding older articles. This incentives more "new" articles, cause more or less what we see today.
So the "dump solution" relies on authors being active in maintaining their posts (up to a point), before being "lost to the void" just like before. It will also incentives the most active posters that maintain their posts, which may or may not be good for the reader.
The feed could take the approach similar to a forum/Reddit where active posts are promoted higher, but this has the side-effect of inherently promoting topics that are more active and or "heated".
The feed could also take a more "active" approach in finding older content that is more relevant to the reader, but this requires the feed to know what the reader is interested in, and what topics they would want to read. (hello big data parsing or big $$$) It already kind of does that with "Another post you may like" features, and "classics" that are promoted on the bottom of the page in most cases.
Maybe the solution is as simple as leveraging existing promotions to older popular posts more heavily, or stronger "reader" filters?
Its an interesting question, without a simple answer that is for sure tho haha :)
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I think the best solution(s) depends on what we think is important for readers, as this problem isn't really that important for authors, as being made aware of duplicate content wont stop those that don't care, and you might already be aware of older posts as a reader.
The reason I say any solution should focus on the read is because there are always going to be more readers the authors, and expanding the platform relies more on getting more readers, with a few turning to authors than too many authors and only a few readers, as then things turn into a "shouting match".
I see the current feed as being focused on the new, at the cost of the old. Where newer articles are promoted over finding older articles. This incentives more "new" articles, cause more or less what we see today.
So the "dump solution" relies on authors being active in maintaining their posts (up to a point), before being "lost to the void" just like before. It will also incentives the most active posters that maintain their posts, which may or may not be good for the reader.
The feed could take the approach similar to a forum/Reddit where active posts are promoted higher, but this has the side-effect of inherently promoting topics that are more active and or "heated".
The feed could also take a more "active" approach in finding older content that is more relevant to the reader, but this requires the feed to know what the reader is interested in, and what topics they would want to read. (hello big data parsing or big $$$) It already kind of does that with "Another post you may like" features, and "classics" that are promoted on the bottom of the page in most cases.
Maybe the solution is as simple as leveraging existing promotions to older popular posts more heavily, or stronger "reader" filters?
Its an interesting question, without a simple answer that is for sure tho haha :)