My vision for protection of intellectual property. Networking of readers. Protection against both plagiarism (those who cheat for undeserved advantages), and against libels (although you having choosen to do everything right). Licensing your intellectual property through such networking, etc.
Publishing intellectual property, whether software or ideas, in some humble but understandable/usable form, and then grow on demand.
The demand-for-growth may be my own motivation/sequencing of the publication steps, or the readers's requests for further work in one or more of the particular directions I am listing as available-visions.
Either way, the gradual development will be a public process. This not only lets the author be more responsive and fresh with the readers, but also, especially relevant to software probably, this may help the author(s) claim their own intellectual property better, in an age where we have to keep the popular software we use updated against latest worms, our office/house clean from spycams, etc. (Not to mention the older ways of intrusion: theft/spying/telepathy/genies/whatever/etc.)
This issue of gradual-releases is an integral part of my vision as well as my strategy. This is an important mechanism integrated into my solution for intellectual property claims: Utilizing reader feedbacks, along with the gradual versioning.
That way, in some early point, one can identify the "similar" authors, and then the identification/clash in public will be more explicit. The unreferenced, or software-code stolen author will then more easily spot the duplicators and differentiate oneself, in later releases.
The strategy I am proposing is meaningful as well as cheatless. It may also improve your understanding what you read, and your quality of life and development, too.
This is partly because comparing and contrasting different materials you read usually develops your understanding and your further thinking.
Furthermore, through that process, the original/real content-producers will be rewarded and known better, and that will be reflected on the readers in the next step of the cycle.
In the passing, let me remind you: For your reference, I keep the old versions of my documents accessible on-line. As a simple mechanism, they include the release-to-web dates, too. Such may be useful to do, at least, for some category of potential abuses.
Human communication is rarely a sterile process. At least, it need not be. Feedback from readers/users with respect to how they evaluate you with respect to others, lets you develop content better. Known stuff. Only, let me have expressed in context.
A demonstration of my strategy and bonus results: Some of the sentences you read on this page or at this site may sound "very popular" (as sometimes I notice). If, at any point, you come to think some part of this text may be too vague/popular, or "already exists" and as a result, meaningless, or unworth the telling, then please, send me a request for clarification for that section.
I may either clarify my position, or if some similarity, I may refer to those (unknown to me, or forgotten) previous sources - unless I find reasons to consider I may be the unreferenced source.
There may stillbe a lot to be written on this page, related to issue(s) of publication, privacy, and protection of both. I have not finished it, yet. :-)