system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Is there a way to know if someone is taken seriously by the philosophical community?

To explain better what i mean, I was speaking with someone and they sent a quote from an economist named Walter Block (I'll add it if you want context but not necessary to read for my question)-

>!" Suppose that there is a starvation situation, and the parent of the four year old child (who is not an adult) does not have enough money to keep him alive. A wealthy NAMBLA man offers this parent enough money to keep him and his family alive – if he will consent to his having sex with the child. We assume, further, that this is the only way to preserve the life of this four year old boy. Would it be criminal child abuse for the parent to accept this offer? Not on libertarian grounds. For surely it is better for the child to be a live victim of sexual abuse rather than unsullied and dead. Rather, it is the parent who consents to the death of his child, when he could have kept him alive by such extreme measures, who is the real abuser. " !<

This obviously sounded very problematic philosophically to me, but the person claimed that this professor had good qualifications  and his book Defending the Undefendable (which delves into a bit of moral philosophy) is up there as  “must reads for libertarians” . Now obviously this was not a good argument for it's reliability, but I realized I didn't know how to see if this person was considered philosophically competent to talk about these subjects.

So this is my question- can I quickly get a rough idea of whether someone is taken seriously by the philosophical community without having to spend a huge amount of time researching?

People like Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris are influential to many but consequently have many easily accessible criticisms made on them. But how can I find out about less popular figures like these?
gpt
The quickest and roughest rubric is to see if and where their work is published and if and how that work is cited on Google scholar or Philpapers.

ETA - some papers even by very respected folks are liable to be ignored and (maybe) there might be single works which are important in a particular way by people who are otherwise ignored, so it’s probably useful to distinguish between a person who is taken seriously and a paper which is understood to have been important.