For authors that are unknown to me ~ Yes.
Although I'm not using the reputation score to assess the quality of the post itself. I'm actually using it to check on comments that contains suspicious information on it. There are a bunch of spammers out there that will leave a link of a phishing site that if clicked, it will put your account in trouble.
I usually catch these fraud / misleading comments initially through their reputation. A score that has a really low value is definitely someone that has a bad intention or wrong doing to the platform.
When it comes to the posted contents, I don't usually bother looking at the reputation score. I go straight to the quality of its content, the score is just a number and it doesn't directly relate to the quality of certain posts at a given day.
So for whatever reputation score that an account have, it should not be used as a main criteria of that person's credibility to write his/her content.
I would definitely say no some people may have a reputation of 70 but actually they are not who you think they are in a platform like steemit reputation can be bought in this era of bid bots someone may have a reputation of 11 but in actual sense they were flagged for fighting a good cause for me reputation can be seen in two places the actual reputation which we can see on the person's account and the reputation which the person holds in the mind of the people in the community in my opinion you need to look at the reputation of a person according to how people feels about him or her.
For example abigail dantes has a reputation of one of the most splendid content producer on steemit and she has a reputation of 64 while others with bigger reputations but that doesn't make them better than her because when she speaks in the community she commands a lot of respect and that for me is the actual reputation for you to follow.
When you need to evaluate someone on steemit checkout their engagement level how they relate with people with lesser or higher steem power and reputation as well, checkout the productivity and there goes towards the platform also you can ask people about the mindset which the people you are evaluating holds this way you can get a better reading of them and not by their organic reputation which can be found on their dashboard
When I see the reputation before checking out the blog, I do conclude that this person must be an ardent Steemian to the core. Then I check the contents and find out that some of them might be using bots to boost their reputation or just harvesting rewards and their reputation grows.
Still they are others who's content are worth their reputation plus the efforts they've put in order to grow the Steem community makes them worthy of the reputation.
But however I don't evaluate using the reputation, I evaluate an account by going through the contents of that account, some might be good bloggers but do not have the right support to help them grow. So reputation does not define a person on Steemit.
This is a great question @erikah!
The system I use for analysis to determine reward, is generally comprised between visual appeal, grammar/punctuation, originality, creativity, and personal appeal.
I would love to say that I've been the perfect Steemian, and never taken reputation into consideration, but this would not be the case.
Early in my Steem experience, I took the rep thing really serious. I viewed it as extremely important, but it wasn't long before I realized that it's something that can be gamed, and quickly dismissed it's relevance after.
What I find to be sad about this, is the fact that some members of the Steem blockchain work tirelessly to achieve their rep, and it means something to them, while a new member can sign up, and achieve the same score in no time at all through the use of bid bots. If there were a way for this reputation system to be scored differently, I can see it as a positive feature, but for the time being, it's certainly flawed.
Honestly YES! Well at first!
There are three things I consider when evaluating someone on Steem. First is what his Steem Sincerity Index is. I have SteemPlus installed for a while now and it displays whether what that account is most likely is: a "Human/Spammer/Bot".
Next is someone's reputation. In all honesty, I usually ignore accounts whose reputation are below Rep 45 (especially the ones on the negative). Not too sound arrogant or something, but it's kind of easy for someone who is serious on the platform to have a rep higher than 45. If one is somewhat serious on the platform it will show on their reputation score.
Third is account age. Sometimes when I look at an account and saw that the account have been on the platform for say, over 6months now and he/she still has a low rep and SP, it just means that they are not really serious about the platform. I tend to have a liking on people who will be here on the long run, XD
We all do to a certain extent. Is the person with the weird comment a -11 rep nobody or a 72 rep investor? Communication goes beyond words. Every part of our appearance conveys a part of it. When you see someone's name, someone's picture, someones words and reputation, they all sum up together to create what is your image of a piece of communication.
Every time you talk, you are emitting an image, and every time you read, you are consuming an image. Those little numbers that compose the "reputation" are maybe not essential, but they help you understand a person wholly.
When you see someone with 25 reputation, don't you "know" they're new? Or if they have 38, you "know" they've been here for a small while but haven't had much success and don't have connections. If they're rep 70, you know they're involved a lot. If they're -11, you know they are or were disliked by someone big.
These are little things that make everyone think. Who is this person you're talking to? Is it an honest Steemian, a spammer, someone with big pockets or a newbie putting big pants on?
It's hard to distinguish the value of an user by their reputation score.
You can be a shiny gem but have the reputation stay less than 30 for a while because you haven't been noticed, or have it less than 25 because your opinion on certain things pissed out Richie Rich...
... or you can be a spammy rotten fruit that has a rep score of over 60 just because you got lucky and someone used a ton of bidbots on you.
You could also be a brilliant content creator and have worked your way up to the at least 50+ rep league.
I don't judge people by their rep, I judge them by what their post, comment and replies history speaks about them.
Yes. If a user's reputation is 25, I assume them to be a newbie. If it is below 25, I assume them to be a clueless newbie who has got themselves flagged by engaging in begging for votes or attention or other types of uncool but harmless behaviors. If their reputation is negative, I take them for a spammer or a scammer and will have nothing to do with them. If their rep is above 70, I take them for someone who's been around the block for quite some time, most likely since 2016. Otherwise I'm not inclined to draw any conclusion from anybody's rep other than how much they have been upvoted by high-rep high-SP users who could've been bid bots, too.
Whenever anyone comments on my posts I sit up and take notice if they are over 60 rep. It doesn't mean the comment is any better but I know that this person is a content creator so his comments will be appreciated. High rep's can carry high SP also so the second thing you check is the SP. But rep is the first indicator of a solid steemian and thats why I like it. Whaleshares do not have a rep value and everyone is equal so you have a closer knit network and need to know your peeps. But on steemit if a 75 rep upvotes your content I feel great.
I can say YES and NO. Why?
First, let's discuss YES.
I used to assess people by checking their reputation and activities. That way, I can tell if someone is a spammer or not. If a member is a member for a long time yet with low reputation, I consider the fact that they do take a break at times for personal reasons. However, if they are active yet with low reputation, there must be something wrong with the Steemian. I know a lot of them are either spammers or plagiarists who are flagged by Steemcleaners.
Next, why NO?
Some Steemians who has high reputation are using bidbots. It's fine if they used one bidbot service, but some members uses 3 to more than 5 bidbots on their posts. While others who has high reputations has huge stake, and created multiple accounts, and invest in them. Afterwards, they are using those accounts to upvote posts by the same accounts. It means their upvotes revolves around those accounts which were owned by the same person. That's how I see some things.
A good question and not always straight forward.
It takes a long time to establish a high reputation and normally anyone over 60 has been around a while. This is not always the case though as someone could use bots to increase reputation and climb a lot faster.
Someone who has a rep of 60 plus will normally produce decent content and be a member of the community. It does make me take note and if I like what they have written will most likely give them a follow.
There is the occasional user who has a high rep and is not what you would imagine and never engage with other users. This is a lone wolf who is botting and has no care on what is happening around them. These accounts are few and far between and luckily are easy to spot.
High reps dont really mean good content creators
High reps dont mean the account is a whale (high sp)
Some High reps accounts isn't gotten because of good conents. some are gotten with bid bots upvotes.
But most cases. reps above 60 with good amount of posts(blog posts and comments) means you really've engaged and understood the blockchain (no spamming but just good contents)
I do consider an account's reputation in Steemit
I really dislike those authors that have a negative reputation, it was like the community doesn't like the things that the author is doing.
It maybe because of aggressive comments to other authors, maybe they provide suspicious information or links in their posts or they were just arrogant authors in the community.
We all are aware of some phishers that want to stole out hard earn steem in the community and I try to avoid them.
Arrogant authors also get on my nerves, it's not that I make a debate with this kind of authors. I just don't want to make a contact with them.
No. I read the content and evaluate the person based on the content they post.
Reputation can be bought through upvotes via bots or through friends who are whales. There are accounts that currently have a 60+ Rep that had Reputation less than 0 earlier this year. The only thing reputation tells you is that the account currently gets more upvotes than downvotes.
I always look at someones rep score, but it really has minimal meaning to me. Firstly reputation can basically be 'bought' by consistently buying upvotes from bots, and thus it has lost a fair bit of credibility.
I tend to look more at the content the person is posting, and whether it is something I would enjoy and how active the person is in terms of commenting amd replying to comments.
In general I am very weary of people who have a rep of less than 25, as there is usually a reason for this - often from posting bad quality content or plagarising etc. However, again there are exceptions to this - a couple of people I follow have negative reps but are great steemians, and just got involved in a battle with the wrong person and ended up getting flagged.
Yet, doing so could be incredibly misleading.
Case in point: haejin.
No. reputation can be bought and a lot of people have a negative rep from being flaged by whales or large groups of people that dislike them. I do not think you can get a whole lot of info from someones rep.