Aborting games should result in losing rating points.

@Toadofsky
When can we expect that?

@finlip I'm not sure. It's been in development for over 13 months so apparently the rating system isn't an easy thing to test.

I wouldn't mind if the possibilty to abort games was removed altogether.

If you misclick during a game and hang your queen, you are most likely going to lose. There's no reason to treat misclicks in the lobby seek differently. (Also, it is very hard to actually click on the wrong button on the quick pairings page...)

There are two other reasons I can think of why ppl might abort games: One is "opponent selection" (but that should not be supported anyway), the other one is "your house is burning and you might not have the time to complete your game" (but in that case, rating points are probably the last thing you're worrying about...).

#13 @Dr_King_Schultz not too often but it has happened to me that I hover over the right seek and when I click on it, the seek was replaced by another. I am aware this is probably an edge case, but it has happened to me.

Yes, this happens when the list of players is renewed. And it is not a misclick like in a game. It is good that on rare occasions like these, you can abort withaot eternal damnation.

Aborting should stay.

1. You get paired with an opponent with -300 ELO sometimes - I do abort because I don't want to play with 1600

2. Sometimes you missclick a time control and game starts fast

3. When you meet an opponent you just played (1-2 times) and you don't want play him. It's really a matter of choice and "abort game" should stay.

Furthemore, no one gains or loses rating points over that. And since it happens rarely (in my experience when I get paired with 2100-2200), 3 seconds of wasted time shouldn't bother you.

And what a ridiculous idea about rewarding rating points for a "good sportsmanship". Rating should reflect realistic chess player strength - not his/her sportsmanship skills.

That's not what I suggested at all. Any change to the rating would be imaginary and only shown to the offender. The "refund" would not be a reward at all, just a return to the status quo.

And you should set a rating range to your seeks instead of aborting games.

I agree with Toadofsky that ratings penalties don't work in theory but that doesn't mean implementing them for aborting games wouldn't stop the problem. I think you underestimate the psychological effect of losing even a few rating points to most people (irrational but well...).

Also although it's true that the glicko system wasn't designed with things such as rating refunds or penalties in mind empirical evidence with the rating refund system on lichess seems to suggest that refund of rating points has no inflating or deflating effect on the rating pool so I don't think it's an issue in that respect.

Punishing players for aborting games is ABSURD. My rating is 2100. I seek the game and Lichess give me someone with rating 1700. Why I must play this game?