This question is based on my view of how people treat posts on Stack Overflow. I think reputation points under the name of the user actually do great work, and this discussion proves my theory:
I was so used to being upvoted because I had >60K rep for almost every answer I gave even though it was crappy, now I saw that you had to work at it for a good answer and cannot just post the 1st thing that comes to mind and cultivate your answer to perfection before posting it.
This makes me wonder: did the [SO] devs intend this? I can't find any reason for this.
I agree that in meta this is different. I want to see the view of a high-rep user because he has been on this site a long time, and he knows more about it. But on the main site, do reputation points make a difference?
If a user gained a significant amount of reputation due to being an expert in a specific domain, this doesn't mean that he is an expert in all domains. And even if the community trusts that user, it doesn't mean that all his posts are great. People do make mistakes.