I refuse to vote more than 1 delegate per person. Furthermore, if a person has more than a couple of delegates in the top 101 I will do my best to vote them ALL out. It is harmful and should be discouraged.
I agree with your focus on reputation.
I disagree about refusing to vote for anyone running multiple delegates.
I think it is helpful if very trusted members of the community run more than one delegate as a candidate (at least until we have more than 101 great delegate candidates). They should be named in a clear way to make it obvious they are all related (use sub accounts). They should also be clearly ordered by priority so if you are only going to vote for one of their delegates you vote for delegate "1".
1.alphaBar -> this is your primary delegate, encourage people to vote for this one if they only want you to have one delegate.
2.alphaBar -> this is your secondary, if someone really trusts and likes you a lot they may vote for both your primary and secondary delegate.
3.alphaBar -> this is your tertiary
If it gets very competitive and we have lots of great candidates and we don't allow more than 101 delegates (I prefer a dynamic number) than it could get to the point where few if any would be able to get more than their primary delegate elected. But, I don't think we should judge people negatively for running multiple delegate candidates in a transparent way. If someone was caught trying to run sockpuppets without being upfront then that is a problem and a trust issue.