Correspondence section ratings? (was CC ladder?)

[Axiom]

While appreciating that Glenno puts the work he does into maintaining the ladder, since he switched over to measuring it by number of wins rather than a Glicko-style system I have not found it meaningful. It is now a hybrid of activity and performance rather than an indicator of performance alone.

I concur , we must adopt a performance based rating system as soon as practicably possible.

[Glenno]

While appreciating that Glenno puts the work he does into maintaining the ladder, since he switched over to measuring it by number of wins rather than a Glicko-style system I have not found it meaningful. It is now a hybrid of activity and performance rather than an indicator of performance alone.

I concur , we must adopt a performance based rating system as soon as practicably possible.

In response to these comments, a poll has been created at this thread.

[Glenno]

Final tally of votes in the poll:

Glicko-1: 5 votes.
Glicko-2: 2 votes.
IECG: 1 vote.
USCF: 3 votes.

Therefore, the Glicko-1 system will be implemented.