What I mean is, is it fair to still give the same amount of points for a given action (like answer accepted or answer upvoted) to a person with 300 points as to a person with 50,000? In other words should the increase in rep for that given action be tied somehow to the user's existing activity, like how many questions he's already answered, how much time he's spent on SO or how much points he already has?
I'm asking this because after a certain point, with the current system, a SO user will have it's reputation grow without doing anything. If you've already answered 800 questions people will periodically stumble over them and upvote them even after a year, so that if in that year you've not done anything you still get a good bunch of rep. On the other hand if you you've answered 5 questions and then don't do anything for a year you will pretty much get nothing (which is normal, it's the first situation that I found somewhat unfair).
I'm sorry for being geeky, but shouldn't this be a la D&D RPG style leveling up, in which a repetitive action will give you less and less experience the more you do it, based on the idea that as you do it you get more experience, and can do it a lot easier, so the reward should be smaller?
Shouldn't in the same way a user who's already achieved something like 1000+ accepted answers receive like 9 (instead of 15) points for the next 1000 accepted answers?