TOURNAMENT TROUBLES!

Then it makes sense to allow the "officialization" procedure. :) Any organizer receives a license and holds their official Tournament if they wish... Then you can always ask them - do they have a license? i.e., will you have rating support or not? All other decisions follow from this - whether to play in this Tournament or not...

That's also good. I just didn't understand the restriction on unofficial Tournaments that way. At least 2 official Tournaments take place in a month. Let's say 5 unofficial Tournaments received a license, and all of them are for rating. But each player can only receive a rating from, say, two (a predetermined limit) unofficial Tournaments, even if they play in all five. Because it will again turn out that those who have less time to play will not be able to play in 7 Tournaments in a month. There are drawbacks in that it complicates the accounting of which Tournament the player's rating should be counted towards in their overall score out of five unofficial Tournaments. But it seems that the player will have a choice of the best results from 5 unofficial Tournaments, and at the same time, they will participate in creating a quorum for those unofficial Tournaments for which they decided not to include their rating in the overall score. Even in a situation where they score 100 in all five. Only 200 will be counted towards their score. However, they will not allow others to get an easy advantage with their presence in the remaining Tournaments. Because the rating of the remaining players will still be calculated relative to their hundred.
In my opinion, this increases the player's interest in playing as many rating Tournaments as possible, choosing the best results for themselves, and possibly suppressing the rating of other participants whom they will overtake in other Tournaments for which their rating will not be included in the overall score.