If their comments are consistently good then they should stand on their own merit. Else you just get idol worship and groupthink.
Names are not as useful as you think.
Names are not as useful as you think.
> Names are not as useful as you think.
Ummm... no.
I don't have the time and desire to completely verify everything that everyone says in every forum that I look at.
I doubt that anyone has time for that.
So I will use shortcuts, as does every other human on the planet. One of these shortcuts is reputation.
If someone has a good reputation with me, then that increases the credulity of everything they say. That doesn't mean that if one of the commentators I hold in high opinion says that "Goblins are behind the election hacking" I will just believe it.
However, if one of these highly-esteemed commentators has an opinion about Docker vs. CoreOS Rkt, I will likely take them at their word, if it isn't a critical issue. This doesn't obviate me from doing my on research on technology decisions, but can help guide my efforts.
I don't worship anyone or anything. Everyone's going to be wrong about something, but some are right more often than others, and should be given some benefit of the doubt.
In a thread about legal issues I'll certainly put more weight towards DannyBee's comments, even if he might have totally wrong views on, say, beekeeping.