As the Web evolves, so will the ways people measure scholarly authority. Scholarly authority is being influenced by many of the features that have collectively been dubbed Web 2.0 by Tim O'Reilly and others, and what the author will call Authority 2.0 in order to explore more fully the shifts that seem likely in the near future. In Web 1.0, roughly 1992 to 2002, authoritative, quality information was still cherished. Content was king. Presumed scarce, it was intrinsically valuable. Web 2.0, roughly 2002 through today, takes more for granted. It presumes the majority of users will have broadband, with unlimited, always-on access, and few barriers to participation. Indeed, it encourages participation, what O'Reilly calls "harnessing collective intelligence." Its fundamental presumption is one of endless information abundance. That abundance changes greatly both the habits and business imperatives of the online environment. In this article, the author discusses examples which are by no means fully representative of all authority mechanisms currently in place in online arenas. He also discusses Authority 3.0, or Web 3.0, which most technophile thinkers believe will be driven by artificial intelligences. For universities, the challenge will be ensuring that scholars who are making more and more of their material available online will be fairly judged in hiring and promotion decisions. It will mean being open to the widening context in which scholarship is published, and it will mean that faculty members will have to take the time to learn about--and give credit for--the new authority metrics, instead of relying on scholarly publishers to establish the importance of material for them.