Ryan, Sinth, everyone else involved in creation of the game. First, let me thank you for your effort -- it's really amazing to see the community around this game and how much it evolved since last Dec, when it all started.

What I liked, is that you could play with people of your level. So, playing at 1600 table, you wouldn't have to explain someone how to play, and playing at 1800 table, there was a nice company. ELO was providing a measure to quantify relative skillset -- I'm talking about difference between 1500 points and 1800 points players, not about +/-10 point nuances which are

So, I have my reservations over the current scoring. It assumes, that you play a lot to have your rating up. It means that even if you're a complete idiot, but play 1000 games a day, it much more likely to be up, and if you play just 2-3 a day -- for a relax in between office assignments, you're likely to have from 0 to 10-20 points, which brings you to the same area where newbies, 1-timers, temp accounts are playing.

The preference of playing with people of same skill level is lost. I agree that new system makes a play more agressive and allows better competition for the top-100 places at the end of the month. But for casual player ELO provides much more information about the skill of his opponents -- and his own skill. Chess are going with ELO for past century and it's still Ok.

So my question -- would you enable ELO rating as well? Given that you still have all code for that calcs anyways, it seem to be not so impossible task, while it could bring back all those who express their concerns now. What do you think?