Regarding the VIP name card (which expands if you hover over it)  I see that some users with a gazillion reputation have a normal name card, and some with less than 1000 have a VIP hover card. Based on which rule do you get a VIP name card for stackexchange?
8742
We are experimenting with enhanced user card mouseover popups and have enabled them network wide. You can tell which users will trigger the popup because they have a 3-D drop shadowy look to their gravatar:    Hover your mouse over the gravatar and wait. Note that the user card mouseover popup will only be displayed if the following conditions are met:   Is the profile complete, and long enough? We enforce a minimum length requirement. The user's reputation must be >= 1k  If you have more links than are able to be displayed after truncation, those extra links will be shown in the bottom of the dialog. We order links at the bottom consistently -- if you include a twitter, google plus, linked in, or facebook those links are prioritized. It will be visible on a question and answer detail page, any page with a list of questions, and the /users list. It will not be shown when a question or answer is wiki'd. It will not be shown when excerpt summary is defined as &lt;!-- summary: &amp;nbsp; --&gt; we support explicitly specifying your user card excerpt summary using the following syntax:  &lt;!-- summary: This is my profile, there are others like it but this one is mine. --&gt;   The above example will result in:    This is now mostly complete.  The goal is allow people to show  off how awesome they are inline, without having to click through to the full user profile page.
25498
I'm pretty sure the whole reputation system is put in place so that newcomers learn the different concepts before actually being allowed to use them, and that as a member of one of the other sites in the group you get a higher initial reputation score when you first register to one of the sister sites (like the new Stack Exchange sites that come out of private beta).  That said, why do I get 100 initial rep score for registering, but need 125 to be able to downvote?
90678
On the main Stack Overflow site, I arrived and had a banner: "Congrats, you've gained the privilege – create wiki posts and 3 other privileges" This confuses me, because I only see two privileges listed at 100%. Is the banner just buggy?  Or is there a better place to see my privileges that the page linked to by that banner?
110828
If I am creating a board-game type game, does anyone know if it is legal to use others' names in the game?  ie. A playing card with "George Bush" or "Michael Jackson" on it.  Also, is it the same for brand names?
33835
While users unlock all possible privileges at 20,000 reputation, their privileges are still "enhanced" as their reputation increases. For instance,   An  is granted per 1000 reputation. An  is granted per 2000 reputation.   Are there any other "enhanced" privileges out there that I am missing? It would be great if someone provided an exhaustive list of incremental privileges, as it's difficult to know for sure without sifting through the entire FAQ/privileges page.  At what point does a user gain 100% access to all possible privileges on the site (i.e. the maximum # of delete votes, flags, etc.)?
37765
I'm thinking of changing my username to my real name. Given that I have a presence on some of the sites here (mostly codegolf), what etiquette should I follow when choosing my new name?  As my username is currently Quincunx, I'm thinking of changing it to MyRealName (formerly Quincunx). Or perhaps MyRealName (né Quincunx). Maybe just MyRealName (Quincunx). If I do use these usernames, will people be able to recognize who I am? Or is there already a standard way to change usernames (such as relying on the profile picture)?
45174
I like the community and appreciate the great service it's been to me over the past few months.  Sometimes I want to show my support for a great answer or comment, but I can't because I'm a new user and have only 1 reputation. It seems like the only way to gain the requisite 15 reputation (for voting) is to ask questions?  Until now I didn't have any questions that weren't already answered by the community. Is this the only way? Won't this one day lead to no new users not being able to participate?
114136
This question has probably been asked before, but I just can't find my name. , but the reason that he didn't find his name is because he had less than 200 reputation on Stack Overflow, at the time.  Now, I currently have more than 200 reputation on Stack Overflow; but for some reason, I can't find my name in the .
11181
Don't worry! I got all my 100 reputation :) It just didn't appear that way...    The notification says +100, but why does it say +97 at the top?  Edit  I created an account on server fault, and this time it says +96. I assume it's because of the down votes on this question; however, I thought down votes aren't shown in the rep you gain.
14719
Is there any reason behind the ghost reputation we gain on the meta of a Stack Exchange site? This reputation doesn't add up to anything, but it still shows me I have gained some. Is this supposed to make any sense?
19577
I would like to use a nickname to identify my posts, not a user + number as shown when I log in.   How do I cause the log-in process to log me in as my nickname and not the user + number id (user178183) you have assigned?  Is this perhaps 'OpenIDs are wrongly identified'?  By the way, my nicknames are intrader or mozillanerd, depending on the occassion.
73788
I just discovered I can cast a  on meta at 288 reputation, even though the privileges list marks it at 3k.   Is this a bug?   I do have the "Close Vote" privilege on SO. The question was my own, can I always vote to close my own questions?
11011
Coming from Stack Overflow here.  I understand that a point system is a must when you have experienced and inexperienced users all mixed together in the same boat. However, I don't understand the point of being able to see each other reputation. In fact, on Stack Overflow, the only thing that users gain with reputation are privileges, which is okay. However, these privileges are only meta tools that has nothing to do with their actual knowledge (to some extent). That being said, if these personal privileges were private (unknown to other users), it would change absolutely nothing for the other users, and the user itself.  Now, some of you will say that being able to see a user's reputation is a good overall measure of its actual capacity to answer. So when you see two answers which seem valid, but one from a 200 reputation user and one from a 20000 reputation user, our subconscious makes the biased assumption that the latter must be the best one. Even if it's usually the case, there is already a point system that takes care of that. In fact, if the latter is really a better answer, we vote the question up. If one's bad, we vote it down. As simple as that; no need for reputation.  Also, like stated in this , this makes users worry about reputation, just like if it was a form of RPG where some are better than others. However, the reality is that old users benefit from that, and new users will never be able to come as close in terms of reputation. It's not like boxing where you can prove you can knock your opponent. It's a system where only time can push you up, even if you are extremely knowledgeable but unfortunately new to the platform. Most importantly, I think that a platform like Stack Overflow, which is suppose to promote community assistance and development, is bringing down the majority by exposing the minority, when the main reason why we are all here is to learn.  I do think that a system where everyone is equally exposed on the website would be better. The reputation system would remain, but it would be private, just like the money in your bank account. There would be no bias, and the point system would still work as intended (good = +1, neutral = 0, bad = -1). In fact, it would be similar to the Reddit approach (to some extent), which is in my opinion a way more friendly one.  Any toughts?
15487
Earning badges on StackExchange is, well, fun. But aside from that it promotes quality interaction from users and helps weed out spam (I have never seen a spam post on the site).  I have a community website with about 500 active users, but the spammers are starting to become more prolific.  I would like a way to make the site more engaging while promoting the same quality of interactivity.  How would you recommend to put in a good reputation system, as well as a goal achievement system?
15454
I'm wondering if there's ever a reason or time when a company should have its own user (like say, Stack Overflow), instead of users that make it up (like, Jeff Atwood).   I figure this is kind of a bad idea as someone with access to multiple accounts could upvote himself over and over.... but is there any point this is okay and/or a good idea?
113728
(Posted here as probably applies to all sites).  I was examining my reputation gain yesterday on Stack Overflow: 190. I believe I should have hit the 200 cap. Mainly due to         Respectively, I had 10, 7, 3, and 2 upvotes on those questions alone. There are a couple of other minnows in the list but the above alone should enable me to hit the cap.  There was a user removed sometime yesterday which knocked off 10 points (and possibly accounts for the disparity) but I think (1) the cap should have been recalibrated and (2) I answered (3) after this event before turning in for the night.  I checked all the usual suspects: the reputation graph on your profile and  the achievements tab, but they are all showing 190.
57172
My Area51 account crossed 200 rep today, but still other accounts don't reflect the change in reputation. When will the changes be applied? or is there no association bonus for Area51 account?