Wonderful concept with regard to the 'Distilled Wisdom' wiki idea. I'm certainly interested in lending a hand one way or the other on that.
For those that do not think that 'reputation' has any significance in the on-line world then I completely disagree - reputation is the
only thing of significance that you have in the on-line world.
We may be talking at crossed dolphins here ... sorry, porpoises ... sorry ...
purposes so forgive me if I'm seizing the wrong end of the electronic stick but in our on-line prescence the
solitary defining characteristic is what other people think about what we have said. None of the other normal cues that regulate human interaction or status exist due to the medium of the idea exchange.
Eradicate the past and you are destined to repeat it, to re-phrase an old aphorism. (lots of nonsense clipped away, move on, nothing sensible to read here}.
I suppose the key issue is
if new members pay any attention to reputation. On a related point, I don't think it's been raised yet but there is the problem of reputation versus what is actually perceived by an
individual - I know I have read stuff by people with a fistful of stars to their name and gone {censored} ...
All I can say is that there are people here that I know, like and agree with and there are those that I do not (tho' those on the 'not' side can still surprise me immeasurably

).
Did I arrive at these distinctions via a persons 'rep' score? I have to be honest and say I did not. I formed my own opinion based on what I read of what they wrote.
Thus, previous polemics on my part notwithstanding, does the reputation system serve a purpose at all?
I admit I'm honoured to have what I have burbled be so well thought of by so many people here (and I really mean that as some peoples comments have brought strong emotions to the fore) but {poignant pause} if the new person to the fora does not understand that a bunch of stars does not mean "Posts a lot" but "Speaks a lot of sense, or at least we think so" then does the system really serve a purpose at all?
Not to point fingers but if so-and-so posts then I'm eager to read what they've said as it'll likely be interesting, accurate or thought provoking. If, on the other hand, so-and-so posts then I know not to bother looking unless I want an argument ROFL. I did not arrive at these distinctions via rep stars.
To finish and just to cloud the issue

P) it does, however, have to be said that those with a lot of stars to their name tend to fall into the former category than the latter.