If we can rate opponents behavior, then all of the trash-talking, classless losers, runners, name callers, etc. will get low rankings. Thus if we restrict our opponents to those with a behavior level above a certain amount, we won't have to deal with such horrible people. It may also motivate some of them to show a bit more class.
Also, maybe select our opponents having a similar behavior rating. The scum of the Earth will all end up playing each other and can name call each other the whole game. More mature or classy players will only get matched up with other mature classy players.
Chess.com would be a much better place.
The problem is that the ratings would be subjective.
You list "runners", for example. Somebody plays you and beats you but doesn't play a rematch. And you want to give them a bad rating.
They may have wanted to go get a glass of water. Or the phone may have rung. Or maybe they promised to read a story to a little kid.
All perfectly legitimate.
But you would punish them.
There is already a system to punish disconnectors and aborters. They get put into a special pool if they do those things often enough.
If we can rate opponents behavior, then all of the trash-talking, classless losers, runners, name callers, etc. will get low rankings. Thus if we restrict our opponents to those with a behavior level above a certain amount, we won't have to deal with such horrible people. It may also motivate some of them to show a bit more class.
Also, maybe select our opponents having a similar behavior rating. The scum of the Earth will all end up playing each other and can name call each other the whole game. More mature or classy players will only get matched up with other mature classy players.
Chess.com would be a much better place.