More of a discussion really than a thread, do you feel that the exp bonuses placed on certain classes and races are a reflection of the bonuses gained through that combination? An example would be a Minotaur Berserker. You have a giant, no vuln, and a nice charge. But compare that to an ogre: more hp, faster regeneration, chance to resist damage, giant sized, ... I may be missing some here. But in my experiences here in FL most of the more powerful berserkers have been Ogres over minotaurs.
A paladin, an Elf Paladin has I believe the highest exp bonus in the game. You have more mp, less hp, higher ac, low str which restricts weapon use, and you can't touch iron, sneaking doesn't count much since as a paldin you'll be mounted. The high ac combines with the less hp could be near a balance unless you're a new player without enough gear. In that case you'll be fleeing and using up that mp to heal or spell up instead of dealing damage while your oponnent is trying to spam damage against you. Is the Elf really that much better than the human who has a higher strength and more health? From an outside view the fights while using an elf would last longer, meaning there's more chances for something to go wrong on your part or your opponents.
I'm not saying the bonuses are a bad idea or that they're wrong, just that maybe it shouldn't be this race has THIS much always, and this class has THIS much always. If what you're playing is a power combo then fine give it a high bonus, but if you've decided to try that Gnome Warrior you've always wanted why should you have a higher exp bonus than a Human who's stronger?
Edit: I realize this might sound close to the other exp bonus post but it isn't, that one was more towards pk ranges and pinnacles being in the range of people who are 42 and around that area.
