You know, I truly believe it is supposed to be a good idea. But I've been an online gamer since, well, they used to call them MUDs and MOOs, let's just say that.
What I can tell you is that when an online ... entity ... develops a new system of scoring, the guys who do numbers will game for high score, not honorable play. (Just look at the bulk of this conversation now. Nobody is going, "Gosh, I need to read more hubs and try to find really amazing links to make.")
Which is possibly fine. But in my nearly three decades of this sort of the thing, the more numbers that are applied to try to measure and predict what "quality" is in a HUMAN user-place, the more it becomes a joke of manipulation.
And again, I'm not bagging on the idea. I'm just saying, I've watched so many really great things slowly get eroded by applying measurements trying to figure out/predict/guide "what is good play" (good writing) when, the reality is, quality at some point becomes something you can't measure. It's a measure of the humans doing it. You give people scores, they shoot for scores. At the very least, let the reasons be silent, let people discover success through doing things that deserve to be successful.
Quantifying everything lets the left-brained manipulators bypass the core of what is supposed to matter, and, for a time, will look like it's working. Then, suddenly, the shell colapses because the framework eroded while everyone was watching how shiny the surface numbers were.
This might make me sound like a nay-sayer, but I only write this because I do care.