One the one hand, thanks for taking the time to put the link in the comments and downvote this as a re-post.

One the other, though, you've done that in this particular instance when the articles aren't at all the same one, it isn't actually a repost, and presumably because you'd rather this not be seen as it will somehow interfere with the post you made as it moulders in the morgue of old snaps.

Little enough is said about this subject without suppressing more based on some nebulous claim to the issue held by a fleeting snap now lost to the ten-page timeline horizon at Snapzu.

The way we individually notice and reproach users for re-posts at Snapzu bears some examination. No matter how polite or over-cordial these recriminations are, it's off-putting and costs users. Users’re alienated by their perception that 'power-users' enforcing un-written rules are this place's counterparts to Reddit's unaccountable, mercenary griefer mods. /u/GraphicTruth cited that reason fairly specifically at /r/RedditAlternatives as why he gave up.

Whilst un-written rules may be written out, and un-spoken tribal knowledge can be codified into clearly enumerated rules, the provincialism at Snapzu that dictates an earlier instance of Daily Mail linkspam on a given topic trumps even a thorough round-up of the best available sources on the matter is a problem with this emerging community.

Even if this piece was in one-for-one correspondence with your earlier link, the source, prominence and the moment of this piece carry such meaning that, with all due thanks and respect to you, I will not be un-publishing it. That's me, being candid.