The point should be about the answering of questions not the likelyhood for an easy question for rep.
What is meta?
- Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
- The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
- Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates
If I understand your question.... The blog post announcing the feature explains why it was added. The time spent by answerers is valuable, and providing statistics and other ways to determine the OP's level of involvement and investment in a question is a way to help user's determine if it is worth their time to figure out and post an answer to a problem. That's not to say people with low percentages won't get answers, but they have contributed less to the system, and therefore are less "deserving" of quality answers, in relative terms. This does not mean they shouldn't or won't get answers, but I have no issue with the system making it easier to determine which user's might be more involved and likely to appreciate and/or help improve the answers to their questions. As with all information, the acceptance percentage is only a piece of data, not the whole picture, but I believe it is a useful starting point.
Why is a new asker less deserving of quality answers just because they have a low accept rate?