I generally don't like having fixed, arbitrary values in a point system. Of course, there needs to be fixed rules regarding reputation, but the amount reputation increases doesn't have to be a fixed constant. This would allow the system to adapt in a flexible way to counter unhelpful user behaviour.
To give a couple of examples, a really difficult question that has been unsolved for a long time gets the same reputation reward as an easy question. This can result in a mad rush to swoop on easy questions, while difficult ones may be ignored. I am a newbie, but at this stage I wouldn't bother answering a question that takes more than a minute or two to answer (if that!) because I want the rep. If I did invest more time and effort it will probably be wasted because someone else will probably answer before me.
Now, I know this isn't a site where everyone talks about their feelings and sings Kumbaya, but it may be helpful to tweak the rep system to encourage new users. The goal of the site is to get valuable answers, but I believe the site benefits by gaining a wider range of expertise from being inclusive, rather than allowing a few to have most of the input and control.
Basically, I think the amount of reputation you gain should align with the goals of the site, and can be tweaked to achieve these goals. Of course, these goals need to be clearly defined to achieve this.
For example, a question could worth a base amount of reputation if answered, but the reputation could increase depending on how long it has gone unanswered. In general, I suggest clearly defining the goals of the site. Deviations from those goals could allow the rep calculation rules to change. I'm not suggesting that this be implemented in an instant, but requires some discussion. Think of it like adaptation in nature.
Btw, I like the reputation system. It is an improvement on older "anything goes" forums. I'm just suggesting it could work better.