this is cheating, not benefit. The vetting process have been designed to test your setup for reliability and to do not lost a noticeable amount customers’ data if your hardware fail in the beginning. Because hardware or software problems usually discovered at the beginning.
When you migrate such a pre-vetted node to the actual hardware it could fail and lose noticeable amount of customers’ data. So this method is not good for the network.
@cpare You can run several nodes, but as pointed out - they will not get more data than only one node if all of them in the same /24 subnet of public IPs - we want to be decentralized as much as possible. If you would run them on the same HDD (which is against Node Operator Terms & Conditions by the way), these nodes will affect each other - they will try to use the same resource (HDD) in the same time and as result they will loose the race more often than just a one node on the same HDD.
The one of the benefits in multiple nodes in the same /24 subnet of public IPs, that you can run them gradually - when the first node is almost full, you will start a next one and it will accept full ingress traffic, when the first node will be full. This way you can extend your storage.
Or you can start the next node when the previous is vetted, to spread the load (useful when you have SMR drives).
The other benefit - when you run several nodes (each on own HDD), if one HDD would fail, you will lose only this part of your common data, not all as in case of the one node and big storage.