There are many issues here, so I'll try to cover them all.
1st: 1100-1500 definitely has a skill difference. I compared my stats to people 400 points lower than me to people to 400 points higher than me. My wins against people 400 points lower than me were much in favor of me. My wins against people 400 points higher than me were basically nonexistent.
2nd: I don't know if you're trying to imply that trying to win is abusive, but I feel like anyone that thinks about what you wrote will understand that it makes no sense. If people traded into a winning endgame then they used a better strategy than their opponent. That's not abusive.
3rd: no matter how weird you think it is that the guy in the first game didn't know the Rook + King vs King mate, he is clearly playing legitimately, and it only takes a brief look at his account to see that.
4th: sure, the fried liver is not good. But it is, again, not abusive.
5th: you can report people that are rude in chat, or troll by promoting to a bunch of queens unnecessarily. You do not need to make a forum about it.
6th: the person who made the forum you linked is a troll. He is trying to annoy people like you who will buy into it.
7th: if you make a poll with 200 about whether taking away the queen from the game for -1600 players is a good idea, you will get 0 votes for that, assuming they all answer with their serious response. A queen is part of the game and if you can't handle losing to it then chess is not for you.
Hey sup.
This is not a complaining topic and only thing i want is to bring this as public subject for a discussion because looks like nowadays it is kinda shadowed by the codex of silence while it is actually an issue.
Statement you may find nonsensical at first look: rating 1100-1500 has no actual player skill difference. But at the end i hope you'll recall your games and observe this as clear as me.
Lets start from a little sidestep. With basic sufficient observation, you might notice that there are basically 2 major types of chess players:
1 - Ones that want their win ASAP and selectively pick abusive strategies where you can just farm your points without actually learning, enjoying and even playing the game.
2 - Ones that enjoy game itself and getting better in it as a whole, trying to play strategically and enjoy complex mates in the middle of the board and combinations.
Second ones are cool. Be as them. But first ones are the subject of the post.
Lets have a look at 2 examples. They are a bit exterme, though point is they should not be viewed as some rarity picks from a whole spectre of played games, but are a top-end variations of expressions of some kind of habit.
Example #1
Guy just mindlessly forces an excanges to get the lucky pawn at the end. I meet such kind of players in like 15% of the games. Please leave a comment naming your rate of meeting those guys, it would be cool to compare and build a statistics.
But icing on the cake is... he doesn't know how to mate with a rook. If this game would be posted to "guess the elo" - NOONE will get the rating.
Its.. almost 1500.
Example #2
How many games do you have when fried liver or reversed fried liver is played? Mine is close to 60%. And like 40% of them are made with intention of Qh5. Straight up Qh5 is like 15% of all my games aswell.
Sometimes i just cannot believe my eyes that at my rating people dare to think about opponents as a material for abuse of that 1100 rating trash strategies.
I always target for positional play and middle to long term game plan. And i expect opponents on my rating to be the same because how would they get to that rating otherwise?
Guy just resings when fried liver is impossible.
Answer is simple. They just bruteforce an abuses.
Fried liver and Qh5 abuses are simple but imply precise defence from an opponent so they just mathematically win by amount of games they play this. Losses are not the issue because for 1 loss they get 2 wins on opponent's occasional mistakes.
Another examples. They are not a practical games but mentioning few another patterns in habit.
1 - Sending stupid emojis it chat in the postion of power, when opponent loses a piece or making some else mistake.
2 - Daring to troll opponent when he refuses to resign. Making 8 queens or horeses or whatever.
3 - Stalling clock when opponent counteracts abusive strategy and is about to win in normal manner.
I hope it its not necessary to elaborate why these 3 cases are bad in particular. About second one there even already is a thread where topicstarter proves himself as blind and narcisstic piece of crap for 800+ comments.
Thing is these cases are united with one thing. Such habit is a direct narcissism that targets bumping self-esteem by maximal humiliation of the opponent. You get fun not from the match, but from abusing a person.
And, coincidentially (not really, it is a straight up follow-up), all of them are from the type 1 of the player types i've mentioned in the beginnig.
Conclusion. Chess youtubers teach players some openings and all. Players at 600-900 rank are actually trying to follow them. But they are delusioned because it does not give them a thing. Rating system is broken by abusers in its origin.
I have 2 solutions. First one is to hide rating points, diversify gains like if is a calibration, and show numbers only for players above 1600. It is the point where strategies start to mean something. Senond one is a bit esoteric but.. just remove Q from the game till 1600. All abuses that work involve queen. Delete it till the point where it is proved that players can and want to play chess not do abuses and personal attacks. Q piece provides clear greenhouse environment for narcisstic and other abusive habit.