I seem to remember reading this somewhere, but I can't find it on this meta at least...
A saw a user who has 530+ rep but has only asked questions - 53:9 q:a. So he has quite a lot of privileges, despite not really knowing much about Ubuntu (based on their latest question).
Should there be some sort of limit where a user has to have at least a 50/50 ratio or something along those lines to get more than 200 rep.
I would argue that the ability to ask good questions is just as important as answering them.
Remember, reputation is a measure of how much the community trusts you, not a bit for bit measurement for technical competence.
I like Jorge's answer. I would also add, though, that rep isn't just a trust measure either. It's also a metric for understanding how the system works.
So, if you only ask questions - but you've been around a while - then you probably understand when to stop with comments and invite to chat, when voting for closure/flagging are appropriate, and other things.
If you don't allow non-answering people to do this, then you put even more load on your people who are capable of answering - and they stop doing both.
Edit:
Let me use myself as an example:
I'm all over the SE network... just check my profile.
Would I just randomly close things as OT over on programmers.se, because I don't necessarily grasp the scope of their site? No. If there were another power-user of incredibly high rep that popped in to chat and asked me to contribute some closevotes - not to dogpile question - but to solve a problem - Then I might do it.
Will I ever answer a lot over on programmers? Probably not.
Does this make me less aware of how the system works? Certainly not.
As a support to Jorges's answer:
I would even state the opposite: looking at AU as a knowledge source, asking the right questions in the right way (generalizing subject for broader use, correct title, clear description) is a fundamental contribution to the site, at least as important as-, and in a way much more difficult than giving an answer. It is not a coincidence that the quality of questions is a much more discussed issue than giving answers.
Furthermore, the example you mention as a proof for limited knowledge tells us nothing. Each and every one of us has some special "highlights" and some white spots. If you look through the answers or questions of many highly valued people here, you will be able to find both. Including you and me.
