To the @Narrative Network Team, on a constructive and technical note, I think there is probably a way of analysing the data from this discussion forum, and translating it into one or more facets of Narrative platform reputation.
The easiest, and I think smartest way, is what I proposed above: porting all of this content into a special archive niche, perhaps called Narrative Genesis. Then run the reputation algorithm on that niche in a 'historic' mode, to compute a reputation effect from a historic database. If the 'likes' are problematic, wipe those clean, and allow the launch community to start liking things from zero. As an aside, this 'historic mode' would almost certainly come in handy again, for instance if changes to the reputation system need to be applied retroactively in any instance.
An alternative would be to simply ascribe the same amount of activity reputation score to all non-spammy posts. This should be trivial to do from a technical standpoint. Additionally, with a bit of manual elbow-grease, a 'community value' reputation facet score could be rudimentarily computed by looking at all the posts in threads with titles pointing towards matters of import to the well-being of the Narrative platform and community, and simply ascribing a fixed amount of points for each post that contributes substantively to those explorations.
I don't care that people like me would lose out quite a lot, because the depth and length of posts would not enter into the equation - I just want everyone who is actually bringing ideas to the table and weighing them, to be recognised for it. Of course it would be more fair, and not much more effort, to ascribe one of three or four point levels to each post, based on a subjective evaluation of whether the post was only minimally valuable on the one end of the spectrum, or very thoughtful, insightful, and exhaustive on the other end of the spectrum. But again, I'm not hoping for that - just some form of recognition for all of us who have put in the time, and are continuing to do so. Posts like this one, and like the many others people are contributing to this thread, don't write themselves. We are contributing to the well-being and success of Narrative, and that is precisely what the reputation system is meant to acknowledge and reflect.
But again, to me it is a no-brainer - putting the contents of this discussion forum into a Narrative niche that serves as a chronicle of our 'early settler days', is a win-win scenario.
If the Team is indeed proud of the community, and views it as already being a central asset, and if evidence of that is offered in the form of these discussions on this forum, then we all agree that many of the contributions here represent quality content.
If we're unwilling or unable to apply the reputation ethos of Narrative to that quality content, we are already failing in an important regard.
If we are turning down the inclusion in the launch version of Narrative, of supremely relevant, and high quality content, then we are already failing in another important regard.
Both failures have the same solution, with plenty of upside for all.