[justneedaname]

That wasn't the angle I got from the post at all. To me they were focusing on how un-noteworthy it actually is to be top 1%. All they had to seemingly do was take an extra couple seconds to upvote answers, perhaps post a question when a lack of existing answers necessitated it or add onto what others had already said.

The message I took from the post was that it doesn't take a lot to do your part in contributing to the wider community

[SeanAnderson]

That's fair. I was jumping to conclusions a bit.

I think I was focused on them saying that the reason for their ranking was that they were an active part of the community and was contrasting that to my experience. I haven't used the site since I was a fledgling engineer who defaulted to asking S.O. multiple times a day. My lack of engagement in the past decade didn't prevent a meteoric rise in community points.

I do think the underlying message of "it's good to try and contribute to your community and it's not that effortful to do so in a way that benefits everyone" is a good message to try and convey. I'll try to reel back my snark a little going forward.

[okamiueru]

True. I think both are arguing the same. Just different takes on how silly it is. Asking one single, basic question, arguably uninteresting, but just asked early on, grants more access "permissions" than the total of thousands of in-depth questions and answers.