No, don't run away. This might well be a new topic.
Looking at several members' stats - and including my own - the shorter the game the lower the rating. For example, my Bullet rating is now more than 300 points lower than my turn-based. Can any chess.com staffers shed any light on if this is indeed generally so and why it is?
More time you have the better you play?
But since ratings reflect, primarily, not how well you play but the results you get - and your opponents are under the same time control - why the discrepancy?
I find something similar with FICS my standard rating is higher than my blitz, my blitz higher than my lightning.
With correspondence chess u have more options so people tend to play better over all. Some take advantage of those options more then others. Live chess and over the board chess tends to reply more on what u remember concerning patterns and general knowledge more so then the correspondence does. I find that the longer time i have the better i tend to play providing i am focused that is.
The results are a reflection of how well you are playing, so the decrepency has more to do with how much effort you put in and how much time pressure you are dealing with along with how well they deal with the pressure. More time generally means you can visualise more moves ahead and hopefully more accurate as well. Shorter time frame means less time to calculate accurately and thus more mistakes r made. The more somone understands the positions they are playing the faster then can calculate their moves as well. Knowledge really does help when playing faster.