Suggestion: Inactive users will start to see their rating decrease

VIPs could take a collective summer vacation for three months :)

It could also be the other way around - for those who have played to "mute" their rating and then no longer play with the rating calculation, their rating could start to rise on its own. And for those who keep playing but whose rating is stagnant, their rating could start to fluctuate on its own to make it more exciting.

I think this rating is not so vitally important now, especially if you don't play while on vacation and lose a few points during the day.

In chess and checkers, I think they wanted to make the lives so that if, for example, you don't play in any tournaments for 2 years, your rating will decrease somewhat. My rating (lives) hasn't changed, although I haven't participated in official tournaments that are included in the rating calculation for who knows how long. There was a saying in the Soviet Union that if you don't play for 2 years, you drop 1 place, maybe it was implemented somewhere, I haven't heard of any cases in Estonia... There's not much point here, it's enough that the rating is simply not active if you don't play for a certain period of time. In the ranking of intellectual athletes, for example, it applies (I think?) that if you are too passive, you won't appear in the ranking table. In each game, this "graying out" should have a different deadline. In chess and checkers, I would suggest that if you don't play for a year, your rating will remain, but in the shadow of the ranking; you will play a few games, then it will recover, etc.

Well, listen, it doesn't matter. Is the rating high, low, average... will it start to drop if I don't play or not:) It doesn't matter. I've been away for a while and those points have absolutely no importance:) There are many more beautiful things in life than rating points:) and their change.

It's a pastime, not an obligation, it's up to you whether you play or not, but no one has the right to increase or decrease your rating. If I leave for a while and I have 1100 points, for example, and when I come back, I have to have the same 1100 points. If the ratings start changing by themselves, then there's no point in it at all... then it's better to lose your rating altogether and see how many players are left... I also agree that the rating is not that important now. But a little adrenaline rush still wears off. Now think about it, if the rating disappears, you can play games to the end. A harsh word would be if 30 percent of games are played to the end, but I would also dare to doubt that.

should still do -550 points, anyway, it would be a little more exciting to sift through

For me, the most similar rating is with the best players, who are pleasant to play with and who create a pleasant post-game mood. A bad game mood would take its toll on a hundred.

it's in the hundreds!

I remember my father saying that when he missed a game for 2 weeks, his gaming skills started to drop. I've noticed this myself. A perfectly normal suggestion is to lower the user's rating if they haven't played for a while. Then it's easier to understand what level the opponent is at. But if the user has been practicing vigorously elsewhere in the meantime, Vindi can prove himself again and it's more than certain that with a few games the rating will be back and even higher due to the surprise of the moment. Vindi shouldn't be treated like a bank where points are securely stored, the rating needs to be constantly updated, then there will be a fairer and clearer overview.