Before I present this case I want to point out some potential conflicts of interest (I have addressed these at the end in my disclaimer to avoid clutter). I do have to start these case studies somewhere so I wanted to pick one which I have had time to review the incident and can provide a more complete narrative.
I have participated in many contests on Steemit previously so I do know some of the people (as you will find out) not just as a contestant in these competitions. If the points raised appear to be biased or opinionated please point them out and I will do my best to edit these out (unless there is a specific purpose for stating those opinions).
So now to the first case study, which deals with something that most people on Steemit will be very familiar with (and hopefully enjoy). I think a #factcheck would be very interesting here, because I am sure that most steemians are of the view that contests exist for at least one of the following reasons:
And that contests should probably not exist for these reasons:
I like contests that combine a couple of the positive benefits, and so I have participated in a few of them (I won't name them because it is not the point of this post to promote them in any way). However, the case study does involve one of the contests that I participated in, and in fact was asked to be a guest judge for when the incident occurred.
For you reference, this is the contest (https://steemit.com/popcontest/@karenmckersie/new-steemit-power-of-positivity-p-o-p-contest-15-last-weeks-winners-announced-2-new-rules-added) but the rest of the post will just be snippets from the contest and comments without further links.
The original rules were quite simple and seem to fit in with the spirit of competitions:
⚫ ✔ Up vote and resteem the main contest post .
⚫✔ Only 1 Positive Themed Original Post Entry each as mentioned above ! ( No NSFW )
(but you can use the #popcontest tag when you like in your positive posts ! just the first entry will count .)
⚫✔ Put a link to your original positive post entry in my comments below so I see it sooner , and can up vote and resteem your post sooner !
As well as the original contest rules, two more were added as a results of a discrepancy that was raised by other users:
The post where the second discrepancy came from is linked here (again I don't want to promote it unnecessarily): https://steemit.com/popcontest/@himshweta/pop-contest-entry-life-of-a-steemit-user
There were a lot more comments that were related to these discrepancies, but I think I have shown enough to keep moving on but if you want to read more than please feel free to do so (I think it is actually a very good exercise in how to deal with people on steemit if you ever find yourself in similar situations).
The issue is around the rules of the contest and how it doesn't specifically say that content that have already received a payout and that re-entering an existing post into a contest is against the 'spirit' of the competition. This means that the additional rules were required to resolve what become a very long conversation in a post that took up time and effort from people that could be put somewhere else (read the comments if you want to in the second discrepancy).
⚫✔ (1) No reposting / editing , Your all ready made posts , or editing posts that have all ready paid out Especially if you Did Not Decline Pay Out the second time around To get double rewards plus possibly winnings from the contest for the exact same content . Thank You !
⚫✔ (2) Use #popcontest as the first tag / REASON : This makes it easier for us to distinguish that Your Post IS An Entry , and not just a post useing the #popcontest tag ! As you can use the tag for positive posts all you want but only one entry useing the tag as their first Will Be Judged and easier for my guest judge to find . Thank You!
How do we apply the philosophy of reflective equilibrium and practical wisdom to address this. To summarize the case:
Unfortunately for the two people who didn't actually have the original intention of entering the contest but were told about it by other people about it. Hence their original posts that they created were not for the intention of the contest. Having read the rules of the contest and feeling that they were not able to simply edit their original entry for the contest (due to the tagging requirements), they created an entry with the same content for the purpose of entering the contest thinking that it would be an acceptable case for doing so (since it was their own content that they duplicated).
I think the Steemit community would frown upon any form of duplication or plagiarism (even if is of your own material), and in the context of a contest it is at the organizer's discretion what qualifies as an eligible entry given the rules laid out for the contest (that is within the general spirit of contests in steemit). Perhaps if the contest organizer had an independent party to rule on this then a lot of the comments in at least three posts could be avoided. Practical wisdom might say that if the participants of the contest find it worthy that they can continue to submit entries (but they may feel that future entries might be seen in a slightly different light now), and that rules need to be amended to prevent certain misunderstanding or interpretations of the rules (which the organizer duly made an effort to do).
I actually see no ill-will from the organizer to the participants, and perhaps with some judging criteria provided, for example it can be based on number of comments or even to state it is at the discretion of the appointed judge(s) then it will avoid perceived biases by the participants. In any case, if the actions of the organizer in this incident was found to be against the spirit of the contest then it will damage the reputation and credibility of the contest in the future (which I didn't find this to be the case or resulting outcome).
Does this case change anything about the common understanding about our responsibilities and obligations on steemit (i.e. does it tip the reflective equilibrium in any particular directions)? I don't think so because I don't think there are any specific allowances provided for duplicating anything other than specific parts of posts that are used as references or quotes. There doesn't appear to be a valid case or precedent to duplicate a post in its entirety for an different intent to that of the original purpose, so it doesn't justify changes to our perception of whether this is acceptable or not.
I think the open discussion that followed subsequent to the incidents by the organizer, participants and other users was a good application of practical wisdom, which resulted in changes to the rules of the contest and some exchanges that helped improve communication and understanding between members. I should hope that an independent arbitrator would have also found the case in the favour of the organizer and provided similar recommendations (i.e. amend the rules of the contest).
If you would like a particular incident to be presented as a case study please let me know in the comments section. To read the original post about these cases studies and my interest in helping steemians to mediate or arbitrate better you can read more here:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@plushzilla/practical-wisdom-case-studies-a-treatise-on-conflict-resolution-in-steemit
Disclaimer:
As I have mentioned before I have participated in many contests on steemit, and have submitted entries to the popcontest. I have also built up what I think is a friendly relationship with the organizer of the contest, and through a donation was asked to be a guest judge on this contest. However, I hope that being a judge on the particular contest where this incident took place didn't influence the way I applied the two concepts I used to evaluate the case (if you feel this is not the case please let me know).
