No... I patently disagree with this statement. If you hear from 3-4 people that "XX is crazy! He dumped 2L bottles of water on himself in my kitchen and said he need to be baptized in the 'holy light'. He even called me jesus while I was throwing him out the door!"
If someone tried to attribute a "bad" reputation to another person, it is almost as likely to make someone listen to that person more than they normally would. Badmouthing someone else is basically admitting you are afraid of what that person has to say, which is a good sign that they are actually right.
You are not going to listen any more to what that persan has to say than you would have before (unless you're into baptizing yourself in stranger's kitchens)
it saves time? DO hyou really want to comb through 2000 posts by a user to see if they are in general 'a good source'?
People attribute a good reputation to someone when that person see's with their own eyes that said person reasons objectively and fairly. The very fact that you are trying to convince a new person to accept someone as "having a good rep" before they can gauge for themselves is suspicious! Why would you need to if that person was going to come to that conclusion anyways?
Also "we" are not trying to do that(Hypography) the usesers who make hypography are the ones with that power.
I agree, how do you see writing the code for determining refrences? Shall we include a rating system on 'how good" the refrences are?
So if a rep system must be used, it should have a clear and specific purpose that is valid and be designed for that purpose. Like you could have a ref meter showing how many references someone has provided or something, in case someone wanted to know who to go for to get more references.
So you'd prefer the cops just SHOT you for speeding, or driving the wrong way, rather than giving you a ticket?
Moderators with rep power
I did explain the moderator thing. You guys are around each other more, and have more in common than everyone else does with each other, hence tribal morality. Your rep actions are going to be signifigantly different from normal user's rep actions, and are not representitive of anything signifigant that should be gauged by a reputation system.
I think you mean "other people asked to provide some form of refrence material for supporting their beleifs, who left because they were unable to provide any such proof"
Your right, I don't have statistics on people who left or anything like that. I have seen other analytical minded people attacked by mods and leave.
Further you seem to be advocating the use of Rhetoric as a method of proof: this is what allows any fool who understands nothing to appear to have won an argument while providing no real insight or concrete evidence.