Seasonal ranking.

I personally don't need a seasonal rating, but a permanent one is quite useful. And in most cases, it reflects a player's skill quite well.

Ed, this poll reminds me of the debate about whether a GM restructuring is needed.
An election without a choice.
And again, there's a recalculation of those who are disliked.
Many of those who play do so without reporting, because they don't want to write reports or don't see the point in a rating.
Some only play tournaments and don't have much time to play a season.
Just think about how adequate a seasonal rating is.
Player X can play 50 games in a season with a 70% win rate.
Player Y can play 5 games in a season with a 100% win rate, and all the games are against Player X. In this case, Player X will be higher in the rating than Player Y, simply because Player Y has less time to play.
I have nothing against the rating; it's probably needed to motivate players in some way, but that's all.