I'm very much inclined to agree with Reb here about the whole question of "published". I had drafted length entry about this, but I realized I was just foaming at the mouth and she is much more eloquent here. Personally, I think I post whole poems and drafts less here now that there's a shorter lead time on them being published. But that's really just a courtesy to the journals that might be publishing it a click away in a couple months and not because they unreasonably demand it. There's this weird rift between "published " in the literal sense and "Published" in the po-biz sense. You've technically published-"made public"- something if you share it with anyone at all, even , like Dickinson, in a letter. At a reading, in a workshop/group. Passing out photocopies on the street. But "Published" implies a curated medium. Since it's only this last one that matters if you abide by the all-mighty rules of po-biz (I certainly don't) since in po-biz, since it's the only thing that "counts.", then you can't prohibit the first kind. You can't have it one way and not the other. It's illogical.
In other contentious news, Tupelo Press is apparently having another open period, in which they agree to take your money, aren't even offering the illusion of feedback, and don't even offer you the boon of competing anonymously, which means it costs more and provides less chance of actually being chosen than any contest out there (I think your chances would be better with Jorie Graham). Ouch. What freaks me out is the people who are still willing to bite.