The following obviously was not well received. I can't delete it (house rules) but I can informally withdraw it. Thanks for your attention, anyway.
There is an issue, imo, with the structure of identity on this site. Some users use their real names, and so their reputation here, flows into their real-world reputation. Others are more anonymous, using only screen names. I've noticed that many of the moderators use screen names, yet they have a lot of power over other peoples reputation. That isn't a problem for the local reputation, but it might be for the real-world reputation.
Moderators (and others, of course) can down vote a post for criteria only they believe in. When that happens to an experienced user it is less of a problem, but is discouraging to beginners. The criteria, I believe, are not always fairly applied.
In particular, a person who is anonymous to me could, if I used my real name, affect my real world reputation and I would have little recourse for correction. I find that asymetry extremely disturbing, in fact. Moreover, people signing up most likely don't know all the rules or the consequences of choosing a name.
I think it is unrealistic to force everyone to use real names, though there is a beauty in that. So, for discussion, I make the following suggestion:
Suppose that every new user could use only a pseudonym until their reputation reached a certain level (say 300). Then they would have the experience to evaluate the consequences of linking their local reputation to their global one. The mechanism might be to have a user choose a name from a list provided by the site during signup.
There are also a few minors in the community. Perhaps they should be required to use only screen names. In fact, there are likely laws that speak to this issue in many places.