To keep the Metaverse filled with active players rather
then clogging the top ranks with old farts who dont
play anymore, old scores are devalued over time.

I heartily agree with the intent but not the method.

I dont want to go into why the method currently used
isnt that good, CM has done a fine job of that. But unlike
CM I do not merely wish to adjust the numbers to mask the
wierdness that occurs with his specific set of data, cause
that wierdness occurs regardless of how its masked in a
single instance.

When you want to remove old games from the metaverse
in a slow, continious fasion, you do so by giving less
weight to the older games.

To take an example. I want to average two numbers, lets
say 1,000 and 10,000. But I want to give 5 times as much
weight to the 1,000 number. This means that the 1,000
number is 5 times more important then the 10,000 number.

I would first multiple the 1,000 number by 5, to get 5,000
then add the 10,000 to get 15,0000, and then I would divide
by 6 to get to 2500. This is the same thing as saying I
averaged 1000, 1000, 1000, 1000, 1000 and 10000. I just
weighted the 1000 5 times as heavily.

Now, using 20% devaluation per month as an example(though
5% would be more realistic)

Scores that are a month old would be worth 800 points but
add only .8 to the square root divider, 2 months and 600 and
.6, etc until its zeroed out, essentially removing the
score competely from consideration. Which at 20% would
happen after 5 months.

Some numbers to show what would happen

This example assumes you submit 1, 1000 point game
once a week.

With no devaluation:
1000, 1414, 1732, 2000, 2236, 2449, 2646, 2828, 3000, 3162, 3317, 3464, 3606, 3742, 3873

With 20% devaluation
1000, 1414, 1732, 2000, 2191, 2324, 2408, 2449, 2449, 2449, 2449, 2449, 2449, 2449, 2449

Notice that after 2 months the score competely stabilizes.

Thats because your entering new(identical) scores as fast
as they are being removed.

In a more realistic setting, so long as you individual
scores improve, your overall scores will ALWAYS rise. In
fact, if your earlier scores are much lower then your
more current scores(as is often the case), your score
will rise even faster as those earlier games are taken
out of consideration.

This basicily represents a method to score only your more
recently played games, as its equally effects everyone
there is no unfairness in it. Playing more games will
still be advantagous and so long as you remain active
you will never be penalized by having your individually
scored games becoming worth less over time.

To sum up, this basicily makes your more current games
more important, it does not make your older games of less
value, contrary to what some might think, there is a
difference.

800 points when adding a .8 to the divisor is still valued
correctly just not as heavily. Unlike adding 800 points
while adding 1 to the divisor, which is what is currently
being done.

Actually im not that good at math, techinically you might
have to subtract the sqrt of .2 from the divisor each month
rather then .2. I did the math both ways and the end result
is essentially the same.