IMO it is a mistake to assume that reputation needs to be linked to an identity. I believe that reputation will be earned and sold.

IMO social capital doesn't need a link to identity either. Imagine an anon actor that transfers ownership of the anon account. If the followers/community believes the transfer is to an anon with similar goals/principles, then much of the social capital transfers.

Both will exist IMO - capitals are forms of reputation, and financial capital and social capital play different but important roles IRL. I believe that will be the same online. The former requires no link to identity, while the latter does.

If maintaining the reputation is worth more than burning it (by exploiting trust, etc.) then it can maintain value.
Businesses/brands change ownership, and the reputation transfers with it. Often users/consumers don't know or care about changes of ownership.

how does reputation maintain value without being linked to an identity?

reputation as a commodity. how is reputation effectively sold?

yup. brand is the only thing that matters

Totally agree.  A reputation that is sold is a brand.

This is an interesting take - I do think that at some level there has to be an entity tied to reputation though

That would enable larger financial institutions to underwrite each other since they’ll need some way to facilitate trust

Isn't the signal value for reputation inversely related to it's transactability?

think this take makes so much sense if you look at all the artificial humans, like Lil Miquela

the reputation can persist across generations, account just needs to be turned over and follow certain guidelines

More like in game reputation than IRL reputation

If personalities are brands they should be tradable like brands