There seems to be at least three different algos and/or storage/cache spaces for reputation:
In my case, all three shows a different value. As of now, I see the following values:
- 36,177 (the latest value of the array in
var din JS source, evidently also highest point in graph)
Noteable is that the graph wasn't updated accordingly during The Big March 2010 Recalc. This inaccuracy by the way also occurs here at Meta, I see respectively 800, 629, 742.
Why is that so? That is counterinituitive to me in developer's perspective. The reputation list seems to be the most reliable source of all. Why isn't all the information derived from the one and the same source? I can imagine of caching reasons, but those differences would mean that there's a bug in the code responsible for updating the cached values.
Problems with regard to inaccuracy of the rep graph were regularly reported, but they were all taken for non serious, seemingly ignored and/or marked as "by design". How that so? It's clearly a bug.
I also note that one would request a manual recalc for this (mods seem to be capable of this). Doing regulary recalcs is imo not a solution, but a workaround.
Note: I am not concerned about the reputation in general, but more about the quality of the sites. To me, this is definitely a bug. Certainly when compared to the relative high-quality remnant of the site.