It can be different depending on which site you originally made your username on. The point being the points system isn’t a grade of posting quality. Easy way to know that is post to like ratio.
I don’t think that’s a good way either. There’s certain posters (one specifically on my mind right now) that never provide any unique content. Just engagement farm. Those scores are pointless in my mind. They reinforce groupthink and I genuinely think they harm conversations more than help them. I regularly used to do things like posting play by play full game breakdowns of games. Well, you figure that’s going to be about 60-100 posts with very little engagement. People who think about those numbers won’t provide content such as that. To me, quality of poster comes down to a few things:
1.) Can they create unique content or contribute in a way that provides special flavor?
2.) Can they articulate meaningfully, coherently and effectively?
3.) Are they respectful of differences, willing to be challenged, open to examining further?
4.) Are they good faith actors? Is there an honesty and genuine quality to their content? Is there integrity there?
^ Now, I’m admittedly a weird guy, but these are the things I look at. This is why I like certain posters that I don’t have anything in agreement with.