This question already has an answer here:
For what it's worth - my question is absolutely NOT a duplicate of the 'hypocritical' one linked above.. though it is similar. I wasn't asking WHY Rep is independent between SE sub-sites (it's perfectly obvious to me). I was instead suggesting a way to take other rep into consideration, and the question was answered quickly and succinctly, stating that, in effect, my suggestion already exists.
I understand the rep-required functionality to prevent poor quality comments and whatever else rep is used for.
That being said, it is VERY FRUSTRATING when I (and I imagine others) have something valuable to contribute, or an important, relevant question to ask, but am denied the ability to 'comment' because my rep is lacking on the particular Stack-Echange sub-site that I am using.
I end up posting as an 'answer' instead (because I'm the rebellious type like that) and then I get in trouble (frowny face)
Might it be useful to somehow consider other Stack-Exchange sub-site rep when determining restrictions? Perhaps an average across all enrolled sub-sites? Or as a specific example, considering Server-Fault or Stack-Overflow rep for Super-User requirements? (As it would seem unlikely to me that someone with a good SF/SO rep would offer a low-quality contribution in SU)
Yes I know the management of this could be tedious.. but perhaps it is something to ponder?
I speak from experience.. petty hand-slapping infractions by self-righteous moderators for not 'following the rules' is the FASTEST WAY to alienate a user who is otherwise trying to offer legitimate help.