First problem that comes to mind is people spamming inappropriate edits.
Need a way to weigh reputation that can't be gamed.
Maybe look at the size of their social graph 3 degrees of separation out. Followers is to easy to fake. But if your followers have to have followers, etc, that's harder to fake.
If somebody has a large following of real human users then that is an indication that the community values what this user has to say. So their wiki edits should be given more weight.
Any edit you make stays in your version of the doc; there are no inappropriate edits, they are more “that’s like your opinion, man”
Yes but how do you select from all the different versions. With such a low barrier to contributing to these wikis there will be a lot of low quality spam.
You can't rely on user up/down votes because it would be trivial to make a thousand npubs just to vote bomb a wiki.
It would be a little more computationally demanding but you could improve this gauge if you filter the count by npubs that have at least a certain minimum number of published events to avoid counting inactive npubs as followers
